Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Private Bills [Lords] (Standing Orders not previously inquired into complied with),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, namely:

Liverpool University Bill [Lords].

Bill to be read a Second time.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

FISHING INDUSTRY.

Mr. JAMES STUART: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he proposes to take any action along the lines recommended in the Interim Report of the Furunculosis Committee, with a view, firstly, to prohibiting the importation from abroad of all live fish of the family salmonidae and, secondly, to forbidding the release of fish or fry from an infected source unless they can be proved to be free from the disease; and, if so, what action he intends to take?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. William Adamson): In consultation with other Departments concerned I am considering whether a Bill should be introduced to give effect to the recommendations to which the hon. Member refers, but I cannot hold out much prospect of early legislation.

Mr. STUART: Has the right hon. Gentleman considered giving the various district fishery boards power, where advisable, to prohibit the release of fish from infected sources?

Mr. ADAMSON: We are going into the question very closely with the Departments concerned.

HOUSING.

Mr. WESTWOOD: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that the County of Berwick have agreed to build 13 houses during the next three years; and, in view of the ascertained housing needs of the county, whether he will call the attention of the county authorities to the necessity of increasing their programme?

Mr. JOHN PALIN: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that the Berwickshire County Council have resolved to build 13 houses in the next three years; and whether he will inquire into the matter and take steps to enforce the provisions of the Housing Acts?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Johnston): In the statement of housing proposals first submitted by the County Council of Berwick in terms of Section 22 of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930, the number of houses which they proposed to build during the next three years was 13. The statement showed that 133 houses were required to meet the needs of the district, 91 being required to replace houses unfit for human habitation. Representations were made by the Department of Health for Scotland with the result that the County Council agreed to increase the number of houses to be erected to 48. The Department, however, have written expressing disappointment with this proposal and have urged the County Council to adopt a three years' programme which will provide a number of houses approximating more closely to the number stated to be required.

Mr. WESTWOOD: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland, seeing that the medical officer of health for Midlothian has declared that 711 houses are required to meet the deficiency of houses in the county and that the county council have only agreed to provide 140 houses
during the next three years, what action he proposes to compel the county council to deal with this situation?

Mr. JOHNSTON: My right hon. Friend is aware of the estimated deficiency stated in the hon. Member's question. The Department of Health for Scotland have made representations to the county council of Midlothian as to the inadequacy of their proposals for the erection of houses during the next three years, and have asked them to consider the erection of a much larger number of houses than the number at present proposed. On receipt of the county council's reply, the question as to what further action, if any, should be taken will be considered.

Mr. WESTWOOD: Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to address a conference of housing authorities in Midlothian, if such a conference is convened by the county council of Midlothian?

Mr. JOHNSTON: Yes, Sir. We have indicated our willingness to explain the 1930 Act at any housing conference called by any county council in Scotland.

Mr. WESTWOOD: Is the hon. Gentleman prepared also to explain the advantages of the Rural Housing Act along with the 1930 Act?

Mr. JOHNSTON: Certainly, Sir. We have always done so.

. Mr. HARDIE: asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware of the declared intention of the town council of Ayr to postpone building houses to meet the shortage disclosed in the recent survey by the medical officer of health; and whether he proposes to hold a public inquiry as provided for in the recent Housing Act?

Mr. JAMES WELSH: 10.
(Paisley)
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the decision of the town council of Ayr to decline to build further houses meantime to meet the needs of the town, as disclosed in the report of the medical officer of Health; and if he will say what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

Mr. JOHNSTON: My right hon. Friend is aware of the decision of the town council of Ayr to delay consideration of the question of the erection of
houses under the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930. The town council itself has estimated that 648 houses are required, 221 of which are to replace houses unfit for human habitation. The Department of Health for Scotland on 16th February urged the town council to reconsider their decision to delay building operations, but, unfortunately, without effect. The local authority have now been requested to furnish the Department with a statement of their reasons for not proceeding with the erection of houses under the Act, and when that statement is received consideration will be given to the question of what further action should be taken in the matter, including, if necessary, the holding of a public local inquiry.

Mr. HARDIE: In the event of the town council of Ayr failing to comply with the requirements shown by the survey of the medical officer, is it the intention of the Department to take the matter out of the hands of the council, and to go on with the work?

Mr. JOHNSTON: No, Sir. The powers vested in the Secretary of State by the 1930 Act can only be put into operation after a local inquiry under the terms of the Act, and it will be necessary to consider, when we get a reply from the Ayr Town Council, whether such inquiry should be held.

Mr. McSHANE: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether rents are still being obtained for the 221 houses which have been declared unfit?

Mr. JOHNSTON: I expect so, but I could not answer without notice.

DEPARTMENT OF REGISTERS AND RECORDS (SECOND-CLASS CLERKS).

Mr. MATHERS: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland from what date the restoration of the status contended for by the second-class clerks of the Department of the Registers and Records of Scotland in their memorials to him of 30th May and 22nd November, 1930, and at his interview with their representatives on 7th February last, will be granted?

Mr. W. ADAMSON: I have given personal attention to the difficulties which have arisen, so far as the status of second-class clerks is concerned, from the decision of the Arbitration Court of
1923, and I have thought it desirable to ask Lord Fleming to call together again his committee on the work of the Department in order that a decision on the claims of the second-class clerks may be expedited.

Mr. MATHERS: If this decision is being linked up with the reorganisation proposals previously made by Lord Fleming, does the right hon. Gentleman not think that in the meantime, at least, the financial position of the members of this very important staff should be seen to; and can he not, for instance, take into consideration the benevolent saint whose day it is, and act more in his spirit in dealing with them?

Mr. ADAMSON: I feel that my hon. Friend forgets that the existing scale of remuneration for second-class clerks was settled before the Civil Service arbitration Court in 1923, and it is not correct to say that the question of the conditions and the scale of remuneration are entirely distinct questions.

Mr. HANNON: Will the right hon. Gentleman take the advice of the hon. Member and introduce Saint Patrick as much as possible into Scottish affairs?

Mr. MATH ERS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the so-called settlement of 1923 was not a settlement which was accepted by these men?

AGRICULTURAL CREDITS.

Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR: 15.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what arrangements have now been completed for providing credits to agriculturists under Part I of the Agricultural Credits (Scotland) Act, 1929; whether a company has now been incorporated under the provisions of this Part of the Act; and when applications for loans from the company will be entertained?

Mr. W. ADAMSON: As stated in my reply of the 27th February to the hon. and gallant Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir A. Sinclair) four of the Scottish banks have agreed to subscribe the necessary share capital for setting up an Agricultural Security Company under Part I of the Act. Steps are being taken for the incorporation of a company, but I am not in a position to say when it will be ready to begin operations.

Mr. MILLAR: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the urgency of providing these credits for Scottish agriculturists; and will he undertake to announce to the House at the earliest possible moment, when it will be possible to entertain claims?

Mr. ADAMSON: I am perfectly well aware of the urgency and that is one of the reasons why I have taken particular care to overcome the difficulties standing in the way of setting up such a corporation.

Mr. SMITHERS: What interest will be charged on these credits?

Mr. ADAMSON: I could not answer that question without notice.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

PRICES.

Colonel CLIFTON BROWN: 18.
asked the Secretary for Mines how the price of export coal during the past two months compares with the price in December, 1930?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Mr. Shinwell): The average declared value, f.o.b., of all coal exported during February, 1931, was 16s. 3d. per ton as compared with 16s. 4d. per ton in December, 1930. Comparison with January, 1931, when the corresponding figure was 15s. 8d. per ton, is affected by the dispute in South Wales, resulting in smaller exports of higher priced anthracite and steam coal.

Colonel BROWN: May we take it that a minimum price has failed to raise the price of coal?

Mr. SHINWELL: No, the position in South Wales was affected by a dispute.

Mr. SMITHERS: Does not the mere fact that the export price of coal is known enable our competitors to quote—[Interruption].

Mr. HERRIOTTS: 25.
asked the Secretary for Mines whether all the districts have fixed minimum prices for coal; whether such prices are now in operation; and will he state the price fixed in each district?

Mr. SHINWELL: In reply to the first and second parts of the question, I have
nothing to add to the reply given on the 3rd March to the bon. and gallant Member for Hexham (Colonel Brown). I am sending a copy of this reply to my hon. Friend. With regard to the third part of the question, I am not in possession of the actual prices fixed in any district.

Mr. HERRIOTTS: Are we to understand from the reply that the hon. Gentleman is not furnished with the prices of coal fixed by the central council in each district?

Mr. SHINWELL: No, sir.

Mr. HERRIOTTS: 26.
asked the Secretary for Mines whether any progress has been made by the coalowners towards coordinating the selling price of coal in all of the districts; and whether he has taken any steps to secure action by the central council?

Mr. SHINWELL: I understand that satisfactory progress is being made by the central council in its consideration of the co-ordination of minimum prices.

PITS (EQUIPMENT).

Mr. WOMERSLEY: 16.
asked the Secretary for Mines if his Department has collected records of pits that still use inefficient equipment; and will he ascertain and state the reasons why it has not been found possible for such pits to modernise their equipment?

Mr. SHINWELL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. So far as the second part is concerned, the reason why some pits have not modernised their equipment is no doubt lack of funds due to prolonged trade depression.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: Has the hon. Gentleman any idea of how many pits are lacking in funds?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am afraid I cannot answer that question.

SUPPLIES.

Colonel CLIFTON BROWN: 17.
asked the Secretary for Mines what steps he is taking to secure an adequate supply of house coal for London in view of the threatened shortage?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am unable to accept the suggestion that there is any threatened shortage of house coal
supplies for London. The National Committee of Investigation have reported that, after a careful review of the evidence placed before them on a complaint by the Coal Merchants' Federation, they are not satisfied that there is any general shortage of coal. The Committee add that in a few isolated cases difficulties may be arising, but these can, it appears, be met from other sources of supply in Great Britain. I am informed that considerable quantities of house coal are on offer in London.

Colonel BROWN: Has the hon. Gentleman not seen the statement made by the President of the Coal Merchants' Federation last Saturday to the effect that they already had to restrict supplies?

Mr. SHINWELL: Yes, I read that statement. Since then we have had conversations with the President of the Coal Merchants' Federation, and he has informed us that his remarks were not intended to convey all that has been assumed from them.

Mr. EVERARD: 20.
asked the Secretary for Mines the number of tons of coal allowed to be raised this month in the collieries in Leicestershire under the quota system; and the number of tons raised in March, 1930?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am not in possession of the information asked for in the first part of the question. The estimated quantity of coal raised and weighed in the Leicester ascertainment district in March, 1930, was 190,000 tons.

Mr. EVERARD: Am I right in believing that the quota is 58 per cent. of what was raised last year; and, as household coal is produced in Leicestershire, and as there is a great demand for household coal, has not the quota put a large number of people in the mines of Leicestershire out of work?

Mr. SHINWELL: That is not the position. The quota is a quarterly quota, and it was not fixed at 58 per cent. but at 10 per cent. below the production for the period before last January.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Is it not a fact that the allocation for the third quarter of this year is 10 per cent. less than what was raised in the first quarter last year; and is it not the case that the present allocation is infinitely larger than
the quantity for which the majority of coalowners in Leicestershire and Lancashire have orders?

Mr. SHINWELL: I cannot reply to the last part of the supplementary question without notice, but I agree with the hon. Member with regard to the first part.

Mr. ERNEST WINTERTON: Has the hon. Gentleman received any complaints from the Leicestershire Miners' Association or from the coalowners regarding the quota?

Mr. HERRIOTTS: 24.
asked the Secretary for Mines what was the quarter's allocation of coal output fixed by the Central Council under the Coal Mines Act, 1930, for all the districts in Great Britain; and what was the output in each district, respectively, in January and February, 1931?

Mr. SHINWELL: As the reply involves a table of figures, I will, with

Districts.
Allocation made by the Central Council for the quarter ending 31st March, 1931.
Estimated quantity of coal raised and weighed during January and February, 1931.



Tons.
Tons.


Northumberland
3,369 150
2,167,400


Durham
9,306 810
5,607 000


Cumberland
599,160
352,900


Lancashire and Cheshire
3,933,900
2,597,000


Midland (Amalgamated)
19,056,060
13,582,200


Shropshire
166,820
107,300


North Staffordshire
1,521,810
962,200


South Staffordshire (exclusive of Cannock Chase) and Worcestershire.
431,930
257,600


Cannock Chase
1,300,190
877,000


Warwickshire
1,190,950
799,800


Forest of Dean
344,610
208,500


Bistol
52,180
33,100


Somerset
232,430
151,900


Kent
400,000
248,300


North Wales
882,740
541,700


South Wales and Monmouthshire
11,859,840
5,164,500


Scotland
7,937,010
5,020,100


Total
62,585,590
38,678,500

Sir VICTOR WARRENDER: 27.
asked the Secretary for Mines whether his attention has been drawn to the shortage of coal supplies in the county of Kesteven due to the operation of the quota provisions of the Coal Mines Act, 1930; and whether he is prepared to take action to ensure that supplies of coal are available for the local population?

my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. HERRIOTTS: Will the hon. Gentleman give us the total for the United Kingdom?

Mr. SHINWELL: The total allocation made by the Central Council for the quarter ending 31st March, 1931, was 62,585,590 tons, whereas the estimated quantity of coal raised and weighed in January and February, 1931, was 38,678,500 tons.

Mr. HERRIOTTS: Does not this show that the quota is far from being exhausted, and can the hon. Gentleman assure the House that there is an adequate supply of coal?

Mr. SHINWELL: These figures indicate that the quota for the whole country is far from exhausted.

Following is the table:

Mr. SHINWELL: I have received no complaints with regard to shortage of coal supplies in Kesteven. My information is that there is no general shortage of coal, and that in those isolated cases where coal cannot be secured from normal sources of supply, alternative supplies are available.

Sir V. WARRENDER: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I was speaking from personal experience and from information obtained from my own coal merchant in the county?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am happy to assure the hon. Gentleman that that is not so. If he will furnish me with particulars regarding the alleged shortage of coal in Kesteven, I shall be glad to do what I can to put the matter right. As regards price, it is wrong to say that coal now on offer in the market is being charged for at a higher price.

Sir V. WARRENDER: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I am speaking from experience?

Mr. SHINWELL: There may be an isolated case due to the heavy weather which has recently been experienced, and which has made it impossible to get an adequate supply, but surely the hon. Gentleman does not assume that, because he happens to go short of coal for a few days, the whole country has experienced a shortage.

COAL MINES ACT, 1930.

Colonel BROWN: 19.
asked the Secretary for Mines what replies he has given to communications addressed to him either from employers or employés asking for the repeal of the Coal Mines Act of 1930?

Mr. SHINWELL: I have received only one communication from a coalowner, and two from groups of workmen representing individual pits, asking for the repeal of Part I of the Act. There is no intention of repealing the Act.

Poland
At 31st January, 1931
…
1,192,000 metric tons.


Ruhr
At 21st February, 1931
…
9,893,000 metric tons (including the coal equivalent of 4,753,300 metric tons of coke and 139,000 metric tons of briquettes).


German Upper Silesia.
At 31st December, 1930
…
1,024,000 metric tons (including the coal equivalent of 467,000 metric tons of coke).

The Rubr and German Upper Silesia cover 93 per cent. of the coal production of Germany.

Mr. GORDON MACDONALD: 30.
asked the Secretary for Mines the quantity of German and Polish coal imported into this country during January and February, 1931, respectively?

Mr. SH1NWELL: The answer is none.

Mr. MACDONALD: Does not the reply show that the agitation that is being carried on has no foundation in fact?

Colonel BROWN: Has the hon. Gentleman brought these communications to the notice of the Cabinet?

Mr. SHINWELL: Quite clearly, there is no need for that.

HON. MEMBERS: Why?

GERMAN AND POLISH COAL (IMPORTS).

Mr. SHIELD: 22.
asked the Secretary for Mines the production of coal from Poland in 1928, 1929, and 1930; and whether there has been any reduction in coal exported from Poland to other countries?

Mr. SHINWELL: The figures asked for are as follow:

Year.
Production of Coal in Poland.
Total Exports of Coal from Poland.




Metric tons.
Metric tone.


1928
…
40,616,384
12,549,252


1929
…
46,236,037
13,933,805


1930*
…
37,515,000
12,497,413


* Provisional

Mr. SMITHERS: Is it a fact that, some Polish coal is coming or has come into the Humber?

Mr. SHINWELL: I shall answer that question later.

Mr. WESTWOOD: 23.
asked the Secretary for Mines what stocks of coal are held by Poland and Germany?

Mr. SHINWELL: The latest information as to stocks of coal at mines in Poland and Germany is as follows:

Mr. SHINWELL: All I clan say is that the trawler owners who, it was reported, intended to secure coal from Poland, have decided that it is unnecessary to do so.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that great quantities of Polish coal were on offer yesterday in Grimsby and Hull?

Mr. SHINWELL: That is not my information. I have information from a Polish source that no Polish coal was actually on offer.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

EMPIRE MARKETING BOARD PUBLICITY).

Mr. WOMERSLEY: 31.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he is yet in a position to state what sum of money the Empire Marketing Board will be authorised to expend during the coming financial year for the purpose of publicity in favour of United Kingdom goods in parts of the Empire, as recommended by the recent Imperial Conference?

The SECRETARY of STATE for the DOMINIONS (Mr. J. H. Thomas): No, Sir.

Mr. LESLIE BOYCE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say if a sum has been appropriated for this purpose?

Mr. THOMAS: The hon. Member knows that the Government have been urged to take steps to effect economies. Every effort is made to see where money can be saved and the Estimate for the Empire Marketing Board will suffer in the same way as others.

Captain Sir WILLIAM BRASS: Can the right hon. Gentleman take some of the money already allocated for this purpose?

Mr. THOMAS: I am sure the hon. and gallant Member must be aware that the money allocated last year is spent. We are dealing here with the coming year.

TRADE POSITION.

Sir KINGSLEY WOOD: 32.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has any information as to whether there has been any recent substantial progress and improvement in our trade and industry?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham): I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answer which I returned on the 3rd February to a question put to me by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Tamworth (Sir A. Steel-Maitland).

Sir K. WOOD: Is the right hon. Gentleman not prepared to make any
statement since the 3rd of February? It is now the 17th of March.

Mr. GRAHAM: My previous reply indicated that it is quite impossible to review the state of trade in reply to a question.

Sir K. WOOD: How is it that the right hon. Gentleman is able to make speeches on this matter up and down the country?

Mr. GRAHAM: When I make speeches in the country adequate time is at my disposal, and not merely time for a few lines only in reply to a question.

IMPORT DUTIES, SWITZERLAND (COTTON GOODS).

Sir K. WOOD: 33.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the House any information as to the recent increase in the duty on all cotton goods imported into Switzerland?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: A recent Swiss decree provides for the increase, as from the 10th March, of the duties on cotton tissues weighing 6 kilogrammes or more per 100 square metres, unbleached, bleached, dyed or printed, as well as certain other cotton goods. Details were published in the Board of Trade Journal for 5th March, of which I am sending the right hon. Gentleman a copy. This increase will not affect the low concessional rate applied to tissues imported for the use of the Swiss embroidery industry, of which I understand the bulk of our trade in unbleached goods consists, and I am given to understand that substantial quantities of our bleached dyed and printed goods will also be unaffected as being lighter than 6 kilogrammes per 100 square metres.

Sir K. WOOD: Will this matter be considered at the Tariff Truce Conference now being held?

Mr. GRAHAM: Not necessarily individual specific cases like this. The Conference is devoted to much wider questions.

Mr. HANNON: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in any representations he has made on this decree he quoted the Tariff Truce as a reason why Switzerland should be treated to some concessions?

Mr. GRAHAM: So far as I understand the question, I think that is not so.

Mr. DOUGLAS HACKING: Will this increase in duty have any effect upon the Lancashire cotton industry?

Mr. GRAHAM: My information is that this is of a very limited effect, and I am glad to be able to make that statement.

RUSSIA.

Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOX: 37.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantity of each of the following articles imported from Soviet Russia in the years 1929 and 1930, respectively: molasses, canned tomatoes (and pulp), and starch?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: During the years 1929 and 1930 the total imports into the United Kingdom of canned or bottled tomatoes (which would include tomato pulp if declared as such) registered as consigned from the Soviet Union (Russia) amounted to 4,552 cwt. and 6,161 cwt., respectively, and the imports of starch (other than edible maize starch) to 4 cwt. and 24,255 cwt., respectively. Provision for the separate enumeration in the trade returns of maize starch for edible purposes, was first made in 1930 and in that year the recorded imports from the Soviet Union amounted to 24,873 cwt. No molasses were registered as imported from the Soviet Union during these years.

Colonel ENGLAND: 61.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the respective quantities of the various types of confectionery, including chocolate confectionery, which have been imported into Great Britain from Russia during each of the years 1928, 1929 and 1930?

Mr. TURTON: 62.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what quantities and what value of chocolate confectionery and other confectionery were imported into this country from Soviet Russia during the months of January and February, 1931?

Mr. GRAHAM: The total quantities of chocolate confectionery, including moulded chocolate, imported into the United Kingdom during the years 1928, 1929 and 1930, and registered as consigned from the Soviet Union (Russia), amounted to nil, 7 cwt., and 1,070 cwt., respectively; the amounts for January and February, 1931, were 944 cwt., valued at £1,974, and 585 cwt., valued at £1,837, respectively. The
imports of sugar confectionery during the years 1928, 1929 and 1930, consigned from the Soviet Union, amounted to 450 cwt., 981 cwt., and 13,360 cwt., respectively, and the amounts for January and February, 1931, were 2,147 cwt., valued at £3,416, and 900 cwt., valued at £1,634, respectively.

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: 67.
asked the President of the Board of Trade particulars showing what restrictions are imposed on the importation of books into Soviet Russia?

Mr. GRAHAM: The list of goods whose importation into Soviet Russia is prohibited includes an item of printed works politically and economically injurious to the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the importation of Bibles into the Soviet Union is prohibited, and will he make inquiries—[Interruption]—as to what excisions should be made from the Bible in order to make it acceptable to the Soviet Union?

Mr. MACLEAN: Before the right hon. Gentleman replies to that question, may I ask him if one of the books that has been refused entry into the Soviet Republic is the "Life of Marshall Ball," by the hon. Member who is questioning him?

HON. MEMBERS: Answer!

Mr. SPEAKER: Hon. Members are making it impossible for the right hon. Gentleman to answer.

OLD SHIPS (DISPOSAL).

Mr. GRAHAM WHITE: 39.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has received the report of the committee which is inquiring into the possibility of action to enable old ships to be sold for breaking up instead of being disposed of to foreign competitors?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: No, Sir, but I understand that the committee has completed taking evidence and is considering its report.

IMPORTS FROM DUTCH EAST INDIES (LABOUR CONDITIONS).

Mr. MATTERS: 40.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he proposes to take any action upon the report of the
League of Nations on forced labour to restrict the volume of imports from the Dutch East Indies, particularly as regards the products of compulsory or forced labour?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I presume that my hon. Friend has in mind the report issued by the International Labour Office in preparation for the discussion by the International Labour Conference of the Draft Convention on Forced Labour which was adopted in June last. I am not aware of any circumstances relating to forced labour in the Netherlands East Indies which would require that any action of the kind suggested should be taken.

ARGENTINA (BRITISH POTTERY).

Mr. HANNON: 41.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether representations have been made to the Argentine Government, and with what result, on the subject of the new classification of duties on imports put into operation by the Argentine Government in relation to high-class British pottery, the effect of which will be to exclude this article from Argentine markets?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Yes, Sir, such representations have been made, and I am glad to be able to inform the hon. Member that the operation of the decree in question has been suspended whilst the matter is being further considered.

Mr. HANNON: Would not this be a favourable opportunity for representations to the Argentine Government that a decree of this kind should not become operative against British pottery, in view of what is happening at the exhibition?

Mr. GRAHAM: Perhaps my hon. Friend will be content with an assurance that the very fullest representations have been made.

Mr. MATTERS: Does the right hon. Gentleman accept the implication in this question that the new classification specifically discriminates against this country?

Mr. GRAHAM: Oh, no, Sir. The question asked whether the reclassification would have adverse effects here, and I have replied to that point.

CUBA (SUSPENDED PAYMENTS).

Mr. HANNON: 42.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to certain practices which have resulted from the law of suspension of payments in Cuba and the injury inflicted on British exporters by the operation of this law; and, seeing that under this law debtors are able to make illicit transfer of their assets and so dispose of quantities of British manufactured goods at prices below commercial values, will he state what action, if any, has been taken by the Board of Trade in the matter?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: My attention has been called to this matter, and I understand that the revision of the law which has given rise to these abuses is now under the consideration of a Cuban Commission.

Mr. HANNON: Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any indication of when this law will be revised? Are these British creditors whose stocks have been disposed of at knock-out prices, to be sacrificed before the law is revised?

Mr. GRAHAM: I could not, in reply to a supplementary question, give information on that point, but I assure the hon. Member that I am making additional inquiries, and I hope to be able to give him further details.

Mr. HANNON: Is not this a very serious matter for these poor people who sent their goods out to Cuba, and will the right hon. Gentleman do whatever he can in the matter?

Mr. GRAHAM: Certainly; I am well aware that it is serious.

IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: 43.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can make a statement about the remodelling of the steel mills on the North-East Coast and in South Wales and report upon the steps which have been or will be taken to replace worn-out equipment?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The measures to be taken with the object to which the hon. Member refers must depend upon the outcome of the negotiations referred to in the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone (Mr. Rennie Smith) on the 15th December last. I am
sending the hon. Member a, copy of that reply, to which I am not in a position to add.

Mr. WISE: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of laying a White Paper stating what progress has been made in regard to carrying into effect the report of the iron and steel committee which the Government set up?

Mr. GRAHAM: I could not, at this stage, promise to lay any White Paper, but I will undertake to tell the House at a suitable opportunity what has been done in the matter of industrial re-organisation, but beyond that I should not like to go this afternoon.

Mr. LOUIS SMITH: Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that many modern mills in that district are closed for lack of work?

Mr. GRAHAM: The whole position of this industry is under review, including, of course, the position of plant which is efficient in every way.

BALANCE OF TRADE.

Sir BASIL PETO: 48.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the Board of Trade abstract giving the annual balance of overseas trade, which shows that the net favourable balance after allowing for total invisible exports was, for the year 1930, only £39,000,000, a decline of £99,000,000 from 1929; and whether he can state what steps he is taking to meet the balance of imports of foodstuffs, raw materials and manufactured goods in view of the continued fall in exports?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): I am aware of this estimate. It would clearly be impossible to deal with the subject within the limits of an answer to a Parliamentary question.

Sir B. PETO: Does the Financial Secretary not think that the figures indicate that it is necessary to take some steps to lessen the import of manufactured goods which we are quite capable of manufacturing ourselves?

Brigadier-General Sir HENRY CROFT: May I ask if the Government are proposing to set up a committee to consider
this question, and will they be sure to see that two of its members are Sir Josiah Stamp and Professor Keynes?

Mr. MARJORIBANKS: And Commander Kenworthy.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Quite clearly, that does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

GLOVES (IMPORTS).

Sir GEORGE HAMILTON: 57.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has any evidence to show that the foreign producers of leather and fabric gloves deliberately held back their supplies for the three months before January, 1931; and, if so, what information he can give?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The rate of importation of leather and cotton fabric gloves into this country was very much less during the period from the 1st October to the 21st December last year, when the Safeguarding Duty lapsed, than during the last three months of any year since the duty was imposed.

Sir G. HAMILTON: Does not that show that the foreigner thought he would have to pay the duty, and not the person who bought gloves in this country?

Mr. GRAHAM: No; I am afraid that that does not follow.

Mr. OSWALD LEWIS: 60.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any compensating advantages for British exporters have been Obtained by negotiation from those foreign countries which, owing to the dropping of the Safeguarding Duty on gloves, have increased their imports into this country from 156,691 dozen pairs in January, 1930, to 451,546 dozen pairs in January, 1931?

Mr. GRAHAM: No negotiations have been undertaken with foreign countries in this matter.

Mr. LEWIS: Are we to understand that the Government have made no effort to get other work for British workers in place of the work of which they have deliberately deprived them?

Mr. GRAHAM: Not at all. A very great deal has been done to stimulate trade, but not by the method proposed.

Sir H. CROFT: Do these imports represent the employment of some 7,000 persons, or is the figure more or less than that?

Mr. GRAHAM: Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member will put that question down.

DYESTUFFS (PRICES).

Mr. WHITE: 64.
asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent the prices of dyestuffs made in this country have been reduced since 14th January, 1931?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I am not aware of general reduction since the date mentioned.

Mr. WHITE: Was it not the understanding, when the Dyestuffs (Import Regulation) Act was renewed, that there would be a reduction?

Mr. GRAHAM: I do not think that that emerged from the Debate. Probably what my hon. Friend has in mind is the abolition of the price factor, which, of course, is subject to other conditions.

INDUSTRIAL SURVEYS.

Mr. HERBERT GIBSON: 65.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Government are prepared to undertake surveys of the principal areas affected by the depression in the basic industries with a view to ascertaining the prospective employment capacity of existing industries and the possibilities of new industrial development?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: In connection with the efforts which are being made in certain areas to attract new industrial development, the Government have decided to put in hand at an early date industrial surveys in South Wales, Lancashire, on the North-East Coast of England, and in South-West Scotland. The co-operation of the universities in these areas has been invited. The object of the inquiries will be to present a survey of the present industrial position of the areas and of the prospects of early expansion and new development.

Mr. GIBSON: While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his answer, may I ask him if he will be good enough to consider taking into consultation the trade union leaders and the employers'
leaders, in addition to the universities, when these schemes are being considered?

Mr. GRAHAM: Certainly. The whole object is to secure the co-operation of both sides of industry, and, as regards the trade unions, we shall be most particular to see that they are invited.

Captain PEAKE: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider including the West Riding of Yorkshire in the beneficial survey?

Mr. GRAHAM: I should not like to go beyond the scope of this reply this afternoon, but the hon. and gallant Member may assume that no important industrial district will eventually be excluded. The initial effort is in the areas mentioned.

Sir ASSHETON POWNALL: Does the mention of the universities mean that the Government now realise the importance of the university franchise?

CUTLERY (PRICES).

Mr. REMER: 66.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the fact that since the Safeguarding Duty on cutlery has lapsed German commercial travellers in this country are offering scissors and pocket Penknives at a reduction of 25 per cent.; and if, in view of these facts, the Government will reconsider their attitude to the Safeguarding Duties?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative, but I am not surprised to learn that the effect of the lapse of the duty has been to reduce prices.

Mr. REMER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that both these commodities are at present being sold at 6d. by Messrs. Woolworth?

Mr. GRAHAM: I have no information on that point. In any event, the facts here are contrary to all my hon. Friend's argument.

Mr. REMER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the consumer is still paying the same price?

CANADA (TARIFF CHANGES).

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN - DOYLE: 68.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give particulars of the new tariff changes in Canada; and
whether he will seize the opportunity to open negotiations for a treaty of commercial reciprocity with the Dominions?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I have received no details of the proposals for tariff modifications which I understand will shortly be laid before the Canadian Parliament. As regards the second part of the question, it is the intention to examine fully at the proposed Economic Conference at Ottawa the various means by which inter-Imperial trade may best be maintained and extended.

COMPANIES ACT.

Sir JOSEPH LAMB: 35.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will consider amending the Companies Act, 1929, to enact that, under Sections 123 and 130 of the Act, an auditors' certificate on the published accounts of a public company shall not be valid unless it certifies that the auditors are satisfied that a copy of the profit-and-loss account has been issued to the members of the company, and that a statement of the remuneration received by the directors has been embodied in the printed balance sheet distributed to members prior to the general meeting of the company?

Mr. TURTON: 58.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will arrange that the advisability of requiring a profit-and-loss account to be shown on the published accounts of a public company is investigated when the Companies Act, 1929, is under consideration for amendments and improvements?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: These suggestions have been noted for investigation when the desirability of amending legislation is being considered. Meantime, I would point out that Section 123 provides for a copy of the profit-and-loss account being laid before the company in general meeting, and Section 128 provides that the accounts laid before the meeting shall contain particulars of the total amount paid to the directors as remuneration for their services.

Sir JOHN FERGUSON: 36.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of companies from whom his Department has failed to obtain returns under Section 110 of the Companies Act, 1929, as at 9th March, 1931; and will he also
state what steps he proposes to take to enable his Department to prevent the evasion of this section of the Act?

Sir BERTRAM FALLE: 38.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that this year again more than 800 public companies had two months after the required date failed to comply with Section 110 of the Companies Act, 1929, he will accept the suggestion, which he refused to accept last year, to invite three Members to investigate the methods and staffing of the Department concerned and ascertain whether it is suitably organised for ensuring proper compliance with Section 110 of the Companies Act, 1929?

Mr. GRAHAM: The number of public companies which had failed to file an annual return for the year 1930 at the date named was 641. The number at the present time is 534. The method dealing with defaulting companies was described in my reply to the hon. and gallant Baronet on the 3rd February, and having regard to the rapid diminution which is taking place in the number of defaulters and the fact that the figure is only a third of that last year I see no reason to think that the procedure is ineffective or that such an investigation as he suggests is required.

Mr. THORNE: Are any penalties inflicted upon companies for failure to make returns, as is done in the case of trade unions?

Mr. GRAHAM: After a certain time there would be a Board of Trade prosecution, and penalties could follow.

Sir G. HAMILTON: 59.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now set up a Departmental Committee to review the Companies Act, 1929, and make recommendations for remedying the defects which have been disclosed in the Act since it came into operation more than a year ago?

Mr. GRAHAM: The revision of the law relating to companies was dealt with by Parliament in 1928, after an inquiry by a Departmental Committee, and the alterations then made were incorporated in the present Companies Act, which came into operation on the 1st November, 1929. I think that it is too soon to insti-
tute a fresh inquiry, but, if the hon. Member will let me know what are the defects which he has in mind, they shall be noted for investigation when the desirability of amending legislation is being considered.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

EN-ENEMY DEBTS DEPARTMENT.

Sir G. HAMILTON: 44.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of persons employed at home and abroad by the Clearing Office for Enemy Debts on 1st March, 1931, as compared with 1st September, 1930?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The respective figures are 338 and 249, representing a reduction of 89, or 26 per cent.

Mr. KELLY: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to when the business of this particular office will terminate?

Mr. GRAHAM: No. It is now much reduced in its scope, but I ought to tell my hon. Friend that there are still many difficult and highly technical cases to be dealt with.

Lieut. - Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: Has the right hon. Gentleman not made a mistake in giving the figures as 338 and 249? Does he not mean that the figures should be the other way about?

Mr. GRAHAM: I beg pardon. I think my hon. and gallant Friend is correct. In any event, I have stated that the reduction is 89, or 26 per cent.

BUILDINGS (COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS).

Mr. HACKING: 45.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any buildings at present occupied by Government Departments will be surrendered, and/or whether there will be any redistribution of Government Departments, as a result of the recommendations of the Howard Frank Committee?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The report of the Committee is still under consideration.

Mr. HACKING: Will the hon. Member publish the report, or, if not the report, the recommendations of this Committee?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I am afraid that the report contains confidential matter which it is not in the public interest to publish.

Mr. HACKING: Will the hon. Gentleman publish the recommendations of the Committee?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I will look into that point, hut the report itself will not be published.

Oral Answers to Questions — FOREIGN TEA (IMPORT DUTY).

Mr. O. LEWIS: 46.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the fact that the proposed scheme for the restriction of the Indian, Ceylon, and Java tea crops for 1931 has been abandoned, and that in consequence tea planters in India and Ceylon are faced with competition from the Dutch East Indies; and whether he will consider giving some preference to tea grown in the British Empire by means of a tax on foreign tea?

Mr. PETHICK - LAWRENCE: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part I cannot anticipate the Budget statement.

Mr. LEWIS: Has the hon. Gentleman received representations from any of the importing interests concerned?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I cannot go into that question, and I should require notice of it.

Mr. WHITE: Will the hon. Gentleman, in considering this matter, bear in mind the fact that when there was a preference one of the results was to divert this tea into Australian and other markets to the detriment of British planters in Ceylon and elsewhere, who had spent much money and time in preparing for this market?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I have no doubt that that question will be taken into account.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNITED STATES (BRITISH DEBT).

Mr. MORLEY: 47.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the present financial situation, he will consider a 10 years moratorium in the payment of debt interest and obligations to the United States of America?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: No, Sir.

Mr. MORLEY: Will the hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of attempting to secure a revision of the debt settlement with the United States of America on terms more favourable to this country?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: My hon. Friend's optimism, I imagine, arises from the fact that he has never been in the unfortunate position of a debtor.

Oral Answers to Questions — GERMAN REPARATIONS AND INTER-ALLIED DEBTS.

Mr. WISE: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any steps have been taken in the last six months by His Majesty's Government with a view to the revision of war debt and reparation payments, having regard to the effect of the drop in commodity prices in increasing the burden of such payments in comparison with that contemplated at the time the debts were incurred or agreements made for their liquidation?

Mr. PETHICK - LAWRENCE: The answer is in the negative.

Mr. WISE: In view of the increasing burden of these payments, and the obstacle they offer to international trade, do the Government propose to take any initiative in the matter?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: That is a point which I have already answered.

Mr. WISE: I asked whether the Government had taken any steps to inquire, and I am now asking whether they have taken any initiative?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I cannot add anything to the answer which I have given.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOLD STANDARD AND RESERVES.

Mr. WISE: 50.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any negotiations or discussions are now proceeding under
the authority of, or under directions from, His Majesty's Government with the French or any other Government concerning the present operation of the gold standard?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the right hon. Baronet the Member for the Tamworth Division (Sir A. Steel-Maitland) on the 5th March.

Mr. MORLEY: 52.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what further international action he is taking to ensure agreement between the chief countries on the gold standard for a reduction of the amount of gold necessary as reserve for note and similar liabilities; and what further international action he is taking for the rationing of gold reserves?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I would refer to the answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the similar question put by my hon. Friend on the 29th January.

Oral Answers to Questions — SILVER.

Mr. MORLEY: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state what international action he is taking to stop the fall in the price of silver?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given to the hon. Member for South Kensington and the hon. Member for the Chislehurst Division (Mr. Smithers) on the 17th February.

Mr. SMITHERS: 56.
asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the amount of silver coinage in the Bank of England, for the purpose of increasing its circulation, he will arrange that all payments by Government Departments be made as far as possible in silver?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Payments made by Government Departments in cash are in the main weekly ages, and I can see no sufficient ground for compelling the recipients of those wages to accept them in silver coin. There is in any case a maximum limit within which silver coins are legal tender of £2 for any one payment.

Mr. SMITHERS: Will not the Government take any steps to try to help the trade of this country?

Oral Answers to Questions — BANKING AND CURRENCY (COMMITTEE).

Mr. ALBERY: 54.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury when the report of the Committee on Banking Finance and Credit is likely to be issued?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Darwen (Sir H. Samuel) on the 19th February.

Mr. HANNON: Is it not very important that we should have this report before the Budget is introduced? It is most important that we should hear from this Committee before we consider the financial proposals for the year.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The matter does not rest with my right hon. Friend. It rests with the members of the Committee, and, so far as I can see, I cannot give any date when the report will be available.

Sir HERBERT SAMUEL: Can the Financial Secretary say whether there is any prospect of the report being received this year?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Oh, yes; I think that is quite certain.

Mr. WISE: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether it is the case that the Committee has only met once, or at the most twice, during the last three months?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I have no information about the sittings of the Committee, and, if my hon. Friend wishes to pursue that inquiry, perhaps he will put a question down on the Order Paper.

Mr. R. A. TAYLOR: Will the hon. Member convey to the Chancellor of the Exchequer the desire in all parts of the House for an early publication of this report?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I think my right hon. Friend is quite aware of that desire, and I have no doubt that the Committee is also aware of it. At the present moment I cannot go beyond the answer which I have given.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: Has the Committee ever met?

Oral Answers to Questions — INCOME TAX.

Sir W. BRASS: 55.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that collectors of taxes in the City of London and elsewhere have received instructions, when applying for the payment of Income Tax under Schedule A, to inform the public that any moneys received after 20th March next cannot reach the Treasury in time to be included in the present national expenditure year; and whether only moneys received before that date can be included in the financial year?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The Income Tax, Schedule A, is payable on the 1st of January and it is the duty of collectors of taxes to obtain payment as early as possible after that date. The instructions issued to collectors of taxes, whether by the local Commissioners of Taxes or by the Board of Inland Revenue, in regard to cases where payment of tax is in arrear are confidential and it would be contrary to established practice to disclose their contents. The latest date of payment for inclusion in the Exchequer receipt of the year is not a uniform date but necessarily depends upon the place of payment and upon the arrangements under which the banks remit the public revenue paid in through their branches.

Sir W. BRASS: Will the Financial Secretary answer the last part of my question? I want to know whether any moneys received between the 20th and the 31st of March in the City of London cannot be included in the financial year?

Mr. PETHICK - LAWRENCE: The answer which I have given includes a reference to the City of London, and I dealt generally with the last part of the question. With regard to that, I cannot at the moment answer the particular point which the hon. Member now asks, but it depends on the place and the particular arrangements made.

Sir W. BRASS: Can the Financial Secretary not say whether any moneys received between the 20th and the 31st of March in the City of London, could or could not be included in the financial year?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I am afraid I cannot answer that question without notice.

Sir W. BRASS: That is the question I have asked.

Oral Answers to Questions — CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS ACT.

Mr. DAY: 69.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what is his decision with regard to the representations recently made to him on the subject of legislation to amend the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: No such representations have been made to me recently.

Mr. DAY: Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the quota provisions are working satisfactorily?

Mr. GRAHAM: That, of course, as my hon. Friend knows, is only a part of the Act, and, although representations were made at one time on different features of it, I am unable, at all events until we have longer experience, to promise any additional legislation.

Viscountess ASTOR: Does this involve the question of the censorship of films?

Mr. GRAHAM: No; that does not lie with me at all; that is for the trade itself.

Oral Answers to Questions — BREAD PRICES.

Mr. WISE: 70.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can explain the difference between the cost of bread to the Army, which is between 4d. and 4½d. per four-pound loaf, and the present prevailing retail price of bread; and what steps he proposes to take to reduce retail bread prices?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I have not sufficient information to enable me to say how these prices are made up. The reasonableness of the scale of prices charged by the London bakers is at present receiving the consideration of the Food Council.

Mr. WISE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when it is proposed to introduce the Consumers' Council Bill into this House?

Mr. GRAHAM: My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has already indicated to the House that that Bill will be taken at the earliest opportunity.

HON. MEMBERS: When?

Oral Answers to Questions — FOREIGN TARIFFS.

Mr. ALBERY: 71.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what reductions in
foreign tariffs have been made in favour of British goods as a result of representations made by the present Government?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: As the House is aware, His Majesty's Government recently addressed requests for reductions of duties to a number of foreign Governments who had expressed their willingness to receive them. Sufficient time has not, however, elapsed to permit of any concrete results being obtained. Apart from this general action, I may perhaps mention that duties on artificial silk goods have been reduced in both Estonia and Argentina following on representations by His Majesty's Government, while in Rumania we were able to secure a general revision in the downward direction of the so-called ½ per cent. port tax which is levied on all goods imported by sea. Diplomatic representations are, of course, more frequently concerned with actual or threatened increases of duty on particular articles, and there have been many cases in which as a result of representations of this character proposals for increases have been suspended or abandoned.

Mr. ALBERY: Is it not a fact that during the course of these negotiations far more increases than decreases have taken place?

Mr. GRAHAM: There have been certain increases undoubtedly, but I should hesitate to say that they were in excess of decreases in the sense suggested by the hon. Member.

Sir H. SAMUEL: Have not these increases applied equally to the trade of Protectionist countries, which are armed with the weapon of retaliation?

Mr. GRAHAM: Certainly. I speak from memory, but I am sure that generally these increases apply all round.

Sir W. BRASS: Are these conversations still continuing?

Mr. GRAHAM: Yes.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

FOREIGN ARMS AND EQUIPMENT (PURCHASES).

Mr. HACKING: 72.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether any arms or equipment for the British Army are pur-
chased abroad; and, if so, whether he will state the nature of such purchases and the value thereof?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. T. Shaw): From time to time arms and equipment of foreign manufacture are purchased for experimental purposes. The amount so spent since 1st April, 1930, is £7,000, mainly on such things as samples of automatic rifles and machine guns and various parts of vehicles.

CEMETERIES, FRANCE AND BELGIUM.

Major CARVER: 73.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether the British military cemeteries in France and Belgium can now be regarded as finally completed; whether any further transfer or construction is contemplated; and whether any additional memorials are to be erected?

Mr. SHAW: The work of construction of British cemeteries in France and Belgium, with the exception of a few tool-houses and shelters, has been completed. Six cemeteries are still open for re-burial of bodies found on the battlefields, but no transfers of cemeteries are contemplated. All the memorials to the missing in Belgium have been completed. In France the commission's last two memorials, those at Thiepval and Arras, are still in course of construction and will be completed early next year.

ARMOURED CAR REGIMENTS.

Brigadier - General CLIFTON BROWN: 74.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether the cavalry armoured car regiment in Egypt has yet been completely mechanised; and, if not, when it is proposed to complete the process?

Mr. SHAW: Provision has been made in the Army Estimates, 1931, for completing the mechanisation of this regiment.

Brigadier-General BROWN: 75.
asked the Secretary of State for War what was the total annual cost to Army funds of the cavalry armoured car regiment at Tidworth; and how does the cost of this unit compare with the cost of a horsed cavalry regiment at the same station?

Mr. SHAW: Sufficient time has not yet elapsed since the conversion of a cavalry regiment to an armoured car regiment to enable me to give any firth figures.

Brigadier-General BROWN: Seeing that we were promised two years ago economies by mechanising regiments, will the right hon. Gentleman get them to go into details?

Mr. SHAW: The answer is explanatory. As soon as figures can be given, they will be supplied to the hon. and gallant Gentleman.

Brigadier-General BROWN: 76.
asked the Secretary of State for War what is the amount of petrol and lubricating oil laid down to be carried on the first and second line transport of a cavalry armoured-car regiment; how is it carried; and how many days' supply it is reckoned to be for?

Mr. SHAW: As it would not be in the public interest to give this information, I hope that the hon. and gallant Member will not press for it.

MARRIAGE ALLOWANCE.

Mr. OLDFIELD: 77.
asked the Secretary of State for War on what principle the reductions in the rates of marriage allowance shown in this year's estimates have been based?

Mr. SHAW: The rates of marriage allowance are determined for each financial year by the official index figure for the cost-of-living on the preceding 1st January, and the reduction in these rates is due to a fall in that figure. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the regulations on the subject.

Mr. OLDFIELD: If it is a question of the cost-of-living figure, how can my right hon. Friend explain the fact that there is no drop in the cost-of-living for the wife and the third child and a drop of 1s. in the case of the first and second child?

Mr. SHAW: I will look into the question, but I must not be taken as accepting my hon. Friend's statement.

MOTOR TRANSPORT.

Mr. HACKING: 78.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the comments upon the use of military motor transport for non-military purposes, made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General in his report on the Army Appropriation Account; and, if so, what action he proposes to take to prevent further abuse of the regulations?

Mr. SHAW: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The matter will come shortly before the Committee of Public Accounts. As a precautionary measure, revised instructions will be issued as soon as possible to prevent the recurrence of cases such as those to which the Comptroller and Auditor-General has drawn attention.

Mr. HACKING: What has the total loss been on account of these non-recoveries?

Mr. SHAW: I cannot say, because the investigation is being carried on after the representations that were made, and until the information is at My disposal I cannot give the answer.

Mr. HACKING: Will the right hon. Gentleman let me know when it comes to him?

Mr. SHAW: Yes, certainly.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL EXPENDITURE (COMMITTEE).

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: (by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he is now able to state the names and terms of reference of the Economy Committee proposed in the Resolution which was passed by the House on 11th February, 1931?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald): Following the Resolution passed by the House on 11th February in favour of the appointment of an independent committee to make recommendations for effecting reductions in national expenditure, the Government have been in consultation with Leaders of the other two parties, and with their concurrence they have decided to set up a committee consisting of a chairman and six members, two being suggested by each party, with the following terms of reference:
To make recommendations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for effecting forthwith all possible reductions in the National Expenditure on Supply Services, having regard especially to the present and prospective position of the Revenue. In so far

as questions of policy are involved in the expenditure under discussion, these will remain for the exclusive consideration of the Cabinet; but it will be open to the Committee to review the expenditure and to indicate the economies which might be effected if particular policies were either adopted, abandoned or modified."

The committee will be constituted as follows:

Sir George May (Chairman), Mr. P. Ashley Cooper, Sir Mark Webster Jenkinson, Mr. Charles Latham, Lord Plender, Mr. Arthur Pugh and Sir Thomas Royden.

Sir AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, as I rather gather, the terms of reference are practically the same as those of the Geddes Committee some years ago?

The PRIME MINISTER: That is so.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask the Prime Minister what is the business for Friday, and for what purpose or purposes he proposes to suspend the Eleven o'Clock Rule to-night?

The PRIME MINISTER: On Friday, the business will be the Small Landholders and Agricultural -Holdings (Scotland) Bill, further stages; the Probation of Offenders (Scotland) Money Resolution, Committee, and, if time permits, the Yarmouth Naval Hospital Bill, Second Reading, and the Committee stage of the necessary Money Resolution. As regards the suspension of the Eleven o'Clock Rule to-night, it is just for the usual purpose, to get the Air Estimates which have been put down in Committee of Supply, and Ways and Means Resolutions to be completed in Committee.

Motion made, and Question put,
That, the Proceedings on Government Business be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 240; Noes, 150.

Division No. 196.]
AYES.
[3.50 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Alpass, J. H.
Ayles, Waiter


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Ammon, Charles George
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)


Addlson, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Angell, Sir Norman
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)


Altchison, Rt. Hon. Craigle M.
Arnott, John
Barnes, Alfred John


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V, (Hillsbro')
Aske, Sir Robert
Batey, Joseph


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Isaacs, George
Pybus, Percy John


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Johnston, Thomas
Quibell, D. J. K.


Benson, G.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Rathbone, Eleanor


Blindell, James
Kelly, W. T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Rlley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Bromfield, William
Knight, Holford
Romerll, H. G.


Brooke, W.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Brothers, M.
Lang, Gordon
Rowson Guy


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Lathan, G.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Buchanan, G.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)


Burgess, F. G.
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Sanders, W. S.


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Lawrence, Susan
Sandham, E.


Caine, Derwent Hall.
Lawson, John James
Sawyer, G. F.


Cameron, A. G.
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Scurr, John


Cape, Thomas
Leach, W.
Sexton, Sir James


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Charl[...]eton, H. C.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Chater, Daniel
Lees, J.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Clute, W. S.
Lindley, Fred W.
Sherwood, G. H.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Shield, George William


Cove, William G.
Logan, David Gilbert
Shillaker, J. F.


Cowan, D. M.
Longbottom, A. W.
Shinwell, E.


Daggar, George
Longden, F.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Dallas, George
Lowth, Thomas
Simmons, C. J.


Dalton, Hugh
Lunn, William
Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Day, Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Denman, Hon. R. D.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Smith, H. B. Lees. (Keighley)


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
McElwee, A.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Dukes, C.
McEntee, V. L.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Duncan, Charles
McKinlay, A.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Ede, James Chuter
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Sorensen, R.


Egan, W. H.
Mac Neill-Weir, L.
Stamford, Thomas W.


England, Colonel A.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Strauss, G. R.


Foot, Isaac
McShane, John James
Sullivan, J.


Freeman, Peter
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sutton, J. E.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
March, S.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)
Marcus, M.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Marley, J.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)
Marshall, Fred
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)
Mathers, George
Thurtle, Ernest


Gill, T. H.
Matters, L. W.
Tillett, Ben


Gossling, A. G.
Maxton, James
Tinker, John Joseph


Gould, F.
Messer, Fred
Toole, Joseph


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Middleton, G.
Tout, W. J.


Granville, E.
Millar. J. D.
Townend, A. E.


Gray, Milner
Milner, Major J.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Montague, Frederick
Viant, S. P.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Walkden, A. G.


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Morley, Ralph
Walker, J.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Wallace, H. W.


Groves, Thomas E.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Watkins, F. C.


Grundy, Thomas W.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Mort, D. L.
Wellock, Wilfred


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Muff, G.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Murnin, Hugh
West, F. R.


Hardie, George D.
Nathan, Major H. L.
Westwood, Joseph


Harris, Percy A.
Naylor, T. E.
White, H. G.


Haycock, A. W.
Noel Baker, P. J.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Hayday, Arthur
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hayes, John Henry
Oldfield, J. R.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Owen, H. F. (Hereford)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Palln, John Henry
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Palmer, E. T.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Herriotts, J.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Perry, S. F.
Wise, E. F.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Hoffman, P. C.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Hopkin, Daniel
Pole, Major D. G.



Hore-Bellsha, Leslie.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Price. M. P.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Astor, Viscountess
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon


Alnsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Baillie Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Berry, Sir George


Albery, Irving James
Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Betterton, Sir Henry B.


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l.,W.)
Bainiel, Lord
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman


Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir William (Armagh)
Beaumont, M. W.
Bird, Ernest Roy




Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Rentoul, sir Gervais S.


Bowater. Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Gower, Sir Robert
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Boyce, Leslie
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Robertson, Despencer, Major J. A. F.


Briscoe, Richard George
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Ross, Ronald D.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Rugggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Salmon, Major I.


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Hammersley, S. S.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Butler, R. A.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Campbell, E. T.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Savery, S. S.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hills. Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst.)


Cattle Stewart, Earl of
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Skelton, A. N.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forlar)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Chamberlain, Rt.Hn.Sir J.A.(Birm.,W.)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Christle, J. A.
Hurd, Percy A.
Smithers, Waldron


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Somerset, Thomas


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Knox, Sir Alfred
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Colfox, Major William Philip
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Colman, N. C. D.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Colville, Major D. J.
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Stewart, W. J. (Belfast South)


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Stuart. Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Llewellin, Major J. J.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Davison, Rt. Hon. J. (Hertford)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Thomson, Mitchell-, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Dawson, Sir Philip
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Train, J.


Duckworth, G. A. V.
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Marjoribanks, Edward
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Eden, Captain Anthony
Milne, Wardlaw., J. s.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Edmondson, Major A J.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Wells, Sydney R.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.M.)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Ferguson, Sir John
Peake, Captain Osbert
Womersley, W. J.


Fielden, E. B.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Ford. Sir P. J.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Pownall, Sir Assheton



Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ganzonl, Sir John
Remer, John R.
Sir Frederick Thomson and Captain. Sir George Bowyer.


Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

BILLS REPORTED.

GUILDFORD GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILL (CHANCED TO "GUILDFORD GAS AND CRANLEIGH ELECTRICITY BILL").

Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

PRESTON CORPORATION BILL [Lords]

Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Bill to be read the Third time.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDER (EAST ELLOE JOINT WATER SUPPLY DISTRICT) BILL.

Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.

Bill to be read the Third time Tomorrow.

Orders of the Day — SUPPLY.

AIR ESTIMATES, 1931.

Mr. MONTAGUE'S STATEMANT.

Order for Committee read.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Mr. Montague): I beg to move, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
The estimated expenditure upon Air Services for 1931 shows a net total of £18,100,000, which is an increase of £250,000 upon the current year's figure. There is a somewhat larger rise in the gross estimate than in the net, the gross increase being £273,400, which is accounted for by an increase in Appropriations-in-Aid of £23,400. As the Appropriations-in-Aid include the provision of the necessary funds for a British entry in the Schneider Trophy Contest this year, it is evident that there would otherwise have been a decline under this item. Hon. Members will realise that gross estimates form the more reliable standard of comparison it we are considering national expenditure upon Air Services from one year to another, and upon this basis our air expenditure is substantially lower to-day than it was six years ago.
4.0 p.m.
Only by the most rigid economy consistent with efficient administration of the Service has it been possible to keep the figures of estimated expenditure as low as those I have given. The rise of £250,000 actually conceals a considerable measure of economy over the whole field of Air expenditure. All concerned have given unremitted attention to the need for effecting savings wherever possible without endangering safety or reducing efficiency. The increase is one of very small dimensions considering the addition that has become due to be made to the strength of the Air Force. When the scheme for Home Defence was promulgated in June, 1923, it was estimated that an additional average cost would have to be imposed upon Air Estimates of no less than £5,500,000. The gross Air Estimates for that year amounted to £18,600,000, so that, if this additional
expenditure had been entailed, it would have meant a gross figure of not just over £21,000,000 but of £24,000,000.
This is not, of course, the whole picture. The Home Defence scheme has been slowed down from time to time, and, consequently, it has been possible to spread the capital outlay over a longer period. But any reduction thus achieved in the annual expenditure under this head has been far more than offset by additional commitments in other directions. Thus since 1923, in addition to progress on the Home Defence scheme, a number of new formations have been brought into being for naval and military co-operation and other purposes. The annual cost of these new formations may be put at about £1,500,000 per annum. This figure, added to the cost of the Home Defence scheme as originally estimated and communicated to Parliament at the time, namely, £5,500,000 as above stated, makes a total of £7,000,000 new expenditure on items for which no provision had to be made in 1923. Yet these Estimates are only £2,500,000 gross in excess of those for 1923, and actually lower than they were in 1925.
These figures will give hon. Members some measure of the savings that have been secured. Of course, the process has been helped by extraneous factors such as reductions in the garrison of Iraq and the smaller provision made for airships in these Estimates, as well as by the fall in prices. Otherwise, the result would have been impossible. But in the main it has only been achieved, as my Noble Friend has pointed out in his Memorandum accompany the Estimates, by the exercise of the most rigid economy on the part of all concerned, and the continuous review of establishments both at home and abroad.
In the forthcoming financial year, three new squadrons will be provided for Home Defence in accordance with the scheme on which the Air Ministry has been working by very gradual stages for some years past. I would remind the House that, when the scheme for the air defence of this country was first authorised in 1923—and it has since been reaffirmed by successive Governments—it was contemplated that A force of 52 squadrons would have been completed in 1930. We are now in 1931. In the past
financial year, one cadre squadron has been added, bringing the Home Defence Force to date up to 39 squadrons, comprising approximately 452 aircraft. But it should be remembered that 13 of those 39 squadrons are organised upon a non-regular or a cadre basis; eight of them belong to the Auxiliary Air Force and the entire personnel—except for a small number of regular personnel and the instructional staffs—is composed of officers and men who are in exactly the same position as the Territorial Army, and would only be called out for service in the event of a major war. This also applies to a substantial proportion of the personnel serving in the five cadre squadrons.
When the three new squadrons are added in the forthcoming year, we shall have 42 squadrons with an approximate first-line strength of about 490 aircraft, but only two-thirds of that complement, as I have said, will belong to the units of the regular Air Force. In other words, in 1931 there will be 10 squadrons fewer than the original scheme authorised for completion by 1930. It is necessary to consider the years as a whole rather than any individual year in analysing the figures I am presenting. The reasons for the slower progress are well-known to the House, and the policy has been justified by successive Governments upon the ground that a major war was a remote possibility. The increase proposed this year was foreshadowed last year. The continuity of policy is in no way inconsistent with those efforts towards international understanding in which this nation has played its important part.
I have no desire to strike a note of alarm in referring to the first line strengths of foreign countries in comparison with the first line strength of this country, but rather to emphasise the point that this country, while it insists upon maintaining a Force of high quality and technical efficiency of the first order, has no desire—even if it were otherwise practicable—to indulge in a race of Air armaments, but looks rather for substantial results to that international understanding which every friend of humanity and progress hopes will be the outcome of the Disarmament Conference. It is a fact, however, that this country stands fifth amongst the Air Powers of the world.
Moreover, in our case, our smaller strength is much more widely distributed and has to bear a much bigger burden in regard to air defence abroad. While it is difficult to give exact figures owing to varying methods of budgetary presentation, it is clear that, whereas British air expenditure may be said to be roughly 1 per cent. lower than it was in 1925–6, there has been a remarkable rise in air expenditure in other countries. Thus, French expenditure is up by between 130 per cent. and 140 per cent. Italians by roughly, 40 per cent., and that in the United States by between 150 per cent. and 160 per cent. In addition, in some countries the figures have been still further increased by extra-budgetary grants, and. as far as the United States is concerned, the figures I have given are for federal expenditure only.
Constant efforts are being made to improve the Air Force in aircraft design and fighting efficiency, and it will be interesting to the House to know that the only two types that are designated "wartime types"—although very considerably modified since their inception—are the D.H.9A and the Bristol Fighter. At the present moment there are no D.H.9A's in squadrons. The Bristol Fighter will still arm No. 6 Squadron, Middle East, but only until the squadron is re-armed on the 1931 programme. The same statement applies to two regular squadrons in India and, in addition, there are two other squadrons in India whose 1930 programme of rearmament will not be complete until June, 1931, when substitution of this type will take place. Thus, by the completion of the 1931 programme, the Bristol Fighter—as well as the D.H.9A—will have disappeared entirely from squadrons. More modern machines which are of course being introduced into the service as rapidly as possible, include the "Fury" Interceptor—an aircraft designed primarily for the defence of London, and one which has a very high rate of climb. The standard fighter for all purposes is the "Bulldog," to which the "Siskin" is now obsolescent. There is a naval edition of the land "Fury" aircraft, the "Nimrod," which has a speed of about 60 miles per hour more than the present type, and a new fighter reconnaissance aircraft for naval purposes is
the "Osprey," which is a suitable adaptation for naval purposes of a new day-bombing machine called the "Hart," which has a better all-round performance than any previous aircraft of this class. I may add here that a number of General Purpose IIIF. machines are being introduced into service this year with air-cooled engines.
Four years ago, the change from wooden construction to metal construction was inaugurated, and this year no wooden aircraft are ordered for squadrons, and only a few of composite construction. Excluding training and subsidiary units, there are at the present moment only 12½ per cent. of wooden aircraft in the Service, and these will, before very long, be wholly replaced by all-metal machines. The term "all-metal" does not, of course, apply to wing fabric, but research has been instituted to ascertain the possibilities and value of metal skin over wings. Technical developments in all-metal construction during 1930 have mainly been practical improvements with a view to simplifying repair and maintenance of aircraft. It is a remarkable fact, and one which indicates the advantages of this system of construction, that the Life of all-metal airframes is, upon the average, double that of the wooden airframe of 1927. Practically every firm is now equipped for manufacture of metal aircraft, and the transition from wood to metal has been almost completed in the short period of four years.
With reference to the work of the Royal Air Force, that force has been engaged during the past year in arduous operations, involving long hours of flying carried out under exceptionally difficult conditions. The serious risings that occurred last year on the North West Frontier of India, called for aircraft action, and there can be no doubt that, if aircraft had not been available, ground operations on a much larger scale than actually took place would have been inevitable. It is unnecessary for me to attempt a recital of these operations and, in any event, that would more properly fall to the Department which is politically responsible. But I would like, in view of possible later discussion, to say just this. Our country is responsible for the defence of India;
defence, if undertaken at all, must be efficient or inefficient; it must be carried out by the most humane methods or by less humane methods, but, in any case, the alternative to the defence of the North West Province, and of Indian villages and citizens would not be peace. It is not a question of the Constitution of India. An Indian Government, of whatever kind of construction, would have to defend the North West Frontier or leave that area to forces of anarchy. I hope that, in any discussion upon this aspect of affairs, the real situation will be borne clearly in mind. If it is a question of humanity or inhumanity, or any degree of humanity, there can be no doubt that, in these border operations, air action is far less an agent of slaughter than any other medium of warfare. It may interest hon. Members to know that, during these operations, the Royal Air Force flew a total of 5,530 hours and in no case did a forced landing take place in enemy territory. These figures reflect the greatest credit upon the officers and men of the squadrons concerned.
During the North West Frontier operations an experiment in provisioning a military force is worth recalling; 1,400 men and 850 animals, moving up from Dargai, were, kept in food supplies dropped from the air during the first two days of their march. Three tons of supplies of ration and forage were dropped daily by 14 aircraft—"Wapiti" aircraft, using a recently designed supply dropping device—each machine carrying several parachute loads weighing up to 56 lbs. and making four journeys daily from the base.
Coming to the work of the Home Defence Force, squadrons were subjected to severe tests in August by intensive warlike exercises. It is true that the attack was to a great extent able to penetrate the defence, but it must be remembered that the modern types of bombing machine were opposed by older types of defensive aircraft. There seems no doubt, however, that air attack, however stoutly resisted, must inflict enormous damage and loss.
I would like this year to make special reference to a subject in which I am specially interested, namely, research, and the valuable support which the Department is receiving from the Aeronautical Research Committee, the Uni-
versities of Oxford and Cambridge—at which, as the House is no doubt aware, we have air squadrons in addition—and from the other universities and places of education and research which have undertaken important and arduous work upon the many problems relating to aeronautics. The main channel through which we receive assistance from the scientific world is the Aeronautical Research Committee, which succeeded the pre-War Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and was set up just 11 years ago to assist the Secretary of State. Since reconstruction into its present form in 1925, the committee has consisted entirely of scientists working in the Government Laboratories and in the universities.
Members of the House have, from time to time, had opportunity of learning of the assistance which the Aeronautical Research Committee is always ready to render on occasion, but they may not fully appreciate the mass of work undertaken by the committee and its various sub-committees. It deals with the scientific investigation of accidents, with problems of aerodynamics, air transport, aircraft noise, phenomena such as flutter and spinning the elasticity and fatigue of metals, wing structure and many other fundamental lines of research. It is through this committee and its sub-committees and panels that the Air Ministry is able to maintain constant touch with various groups of independent scientific workers at the universities and elsewhere, with the result that there is always a large group of the most eminent scientific men—who are acquainted with the problems of present day aeronautics—upon whom the Air Ministry is able to draw when special problems of urgency and importance arise. The assistance rendered by these experts to the Ministry, and also the science of aeronautics generally is of inestimable value.
A considerable amount of important research is also undertaken at the Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, and, if I select one or two lines of development for illustration purposes, it will only be by way of indicating—far from exhaustively—the nature of the work done at Farnborough. The scientific staff and pilots attached to the Royal Aircraft Establishment have been experimenting with one of the most difficult
and, at the same time, important problems of air navigation. That is the question of landing in adverse conditions, especially in fog. The particular experiment that I have in mind is that of fixing the approximate position of an aerodrome by means of a captive balloon let up above a fog bank. Once this approximate position is determined in that way, it is possible for the pilot to reach the ground by means of indicating instruments upon the machine. The experiments have been carried out with very great skill and determination under very novel and difficult conditions, and it is hoped that the knowledge that has been gained will be of value in increasing the safety of flight under adverse weather conditions.
Another problem, affecting civil aviation principally, and of importance to passengers in transport aircraft, transport liners and so on, is that of noise. Experiments begun last year have been actively continued. Comparisons have, for instance, been made with two similar machines, one having geared and the other ungeared engines, with a view to discovering which type is the quieter, and in investigations of this character noise is measured with an instrument called the audiometer, in which a unit of measurement is used which is the smallest difference of strength between two sounds that can be perceived by the human ear. Tests have been proceeding on engine silencers in order to reduce the noise of exhausts, and there has been made a sound-proof cabinet in which different materials are being tested to show ways in which the noise in the cabins of air liners can be reduced by having suitable sound-proof walls.
One of the most important problems in the research programme generally, is undoubtedly that of spinning. The present position is that although the main factors responsible for the behaviour of an aircraft in a spin are known, there is not yet sufficient knowledge of the aero-dynamic forces involved to justify any certain prediction or close prediction whether a design will prove satisfactory in this respect. A possible method of attacking this problem is to have a miniature wind tunnel which gives a verticle flow of air, and in this a model aircraft can be so placed that, if the controls are properly set, it should con-
tinue to spin in the up-draft in approximately the same place in the tunnel, enabling photographs and measurements to be taken of it. Much more accurate results are anticipated by this method than could possibly be obtained from the few spins that a model can give before reaching the ground after being liberated from the top of an aircraft shed—a method of study that has hitherto been adopted. The use of such a tunnel with the vertical flow of air is now under consideration.
The high speed flight during the past year has been engaged on research work in connection with the efficiency of air-screws. A large quantity of scientific information has also been obtained from the machines themselves. The House will appreciate that, when these machines were built at the time of the 1929 Schneider Trophy race, a considerable amount of information was obtained from scale models in the wind tunnels, but there was no time fully to measure the actual characteristics of the machines themselves at full scale. All we knew was that we won the race at a certain measured speed. Since then we have been finding out what the actual aerodynamic characteristics of the machines are and, when these data are fully analysed, they will provide a valuable comparison with the results that were previously obtained from scale models in the tunnels.
These, as I have said, are a number of what may be described as the more interesting subjects which have been under examination and in connection with which satisfactory progress has been made in the past year. Whilst I am speaking upon the question of safety, I would like to give the House some account of what is done as a matter of Air Ministry practice in the direction of engineering reliability in manufacture, in supervision and control and in general control of inspection, particularly with regard to civil aviation. This is a subject which will be recognised as of great importance, in view of the development of air transport in the future. I would say quite definitely that accidents attributable to faulty workmanship or incorrect manufacturing processes are now of the very rarest occurrence. Inspection starts with the raw material and is carried out in one unbroken chain until the complete air-
craft is ready for its trial flight. There is a complete chain of record and responsibility from start to finish.
I have personally seen the A.I.D. system at work and I can speak for its efficiency. Whether it is a question of measurement, torsional strength, elasticity or metallic fault, no test could be applied throughout the work of greater reliability than is the case under this system. I am not able to speak in technical terms or with any great knowledge of physical science, but many illustrations occur to me of a striking character which bear out what I say. One that comes to my mind is the detection of a fine crack in a test piece of metal which I saw in one engineering shop. It may be a common place thing but it struck me as an instance of the thoroughness of the methods of the Aeronautical Inspection Department. Not even a microscopical examination revealed the flaw, but the piece of metal was magnetised and then plunged into a bath of paraffin oil containing iron dust in suspension. Any crack in the metal—however small—formed a gap in the magnetic field and was clearly disclosed by the way in which the iron dust adhered to the metal.
A system has been evolved under which inspection staffs of firms are first of all approved, and I may mention here, as an example of the number of inspectors required, that five Sheffield firms producing steel, of aeronautical quality employ to-day solely on the inspection of that work a staff of more than 150 men. No firm is approved or allowed to take its place in any category—whether in the manufacture of basic material or of detail parts, or of standardised equipment and supplies, or of assembling the complete engine and aircraft—until it has proved to the Aeronautical Inspection Department that its own inspection department is properly equipped and organised, and, therefore, fully qualified to carry out the necessary inspection at each stage. But, in addition to this approval of inspection staffs, an effective overhead system of supervision is organised by the Ministry, and its effectiveness is such that it can be fairly claimed that the control at any approved firm's works is as good as could be secured if all the firms' inspectors were under the direct employment of the Ministry.
The general outline of the procedure is that firms desiring to supply aircraft or aeronautical material of any kind must first apply for and obtain approval of its inspection organisation. The firm's name is then added to the list of approved firms, from which buyers may select the firm whom they ask to quote for supplies. Every firm's name is allotted to one of the area offices of the Aeronautical Inspection Department, and the Aeronautical Inspection Department staff of that office becomes responsible for the supervision of the firm's inspection, making systematic visits, re-inspecting a proportion of output, checking inspection records and satisfying themselves generally as to the competency of new personnel and organisation. Inspection of aero engines is carried out in the same way, and aircraft and engines for the Royal Air Force are finally examined and tested by Aeronautical Inspection Department representatives. An Aeronautical Inspection Department officer and a number of junior ranks are actually resident at each of the aircraft and aero engine maker's works.
This elaborate system of inspection which has been developed has fully proved its worth, and, combined with the high quality of British aircraft workmanship, it puts the British aircraft industry in a paramount position. I can assure the House that no less regard is paid to the care and supervision of aircraft within the Service. The commanding officer of the unit is primarily responsible for the maintenance of all technical equipment; airmen are responsible to him for correctness of the maintenance of the aircraft to which they are allocated. There is a maintenance schedule kept in every hangar detailing the times at which various operations are to be carried out. I have seen this system in actual operation, as well as the method of the daily duty sheet upon which is written the names of persons responsible for carrying out particular work.
The House will be interested to know that of the 35 types of aircraft at present in the Service, 15 are now fitted with automatic slots and four other types are on the point of completion. Slots are being tried out experimentally with flying boats and also with high perform-
ance aircraft of the single-seater fighting type, and, under a recent decision, training aircraft now make use of slots. Taking the proportion of machines so fitted with automatic slots, 80 per cent. of the Service is either equipped or on the point of equipment with slotted aircraft. In addition, as another important measure of safety, a parachute is available for every officer and man in the air, and by the end of this year all types of aircraft in the Service will have been designed or modified to permit of their carriage and use. This applies, of course, to the Fleet Air Arm, and the possibility of doing this for sea-going aircraft is due to the success of the new quick release gear.
I come now to another important branch of Air Ministry work, namely to civil aviation. It is a matter for congratulation, and I think the House will agree with me, that within the last few days 2,675 miles of the 5,700 mile air route from Cairo to Cape Town has been opened. Before the end of the year, the whole of the route will be in operation. Between Cairo and Cape Town there are 27 stations, and this work, together with the development of meteorological and other services, has been a remarkable achievement reflecting credit upon everyone concerned. There are hotels, rest-houses and wireless stations, many in areas that until very recently were rough bush. As an example of the difficulties that have had to be faced and to be overcome, I may mention that where aerodromes have been laid down in the higher altitudes along the line of the journey, the comparative rarity of the air has had the effect of reducing the commercial load of an aeroplane, so that the cost of operation is seriously increased, but, for all the difficulties, there is high hope of the success of the venture and of great subsidiary developments in the future.
The South African service, now partly an achievement, will, it is hoped, be ultimately linked by feeder lines, bringing into air communication with the central line many enormous and wealthy territories. In connection with this service and also the service to India, which are both fed by the service from London to Egypt, I am very happy to be able to announce that the terms of a draft Anglo-Italian Convention have now been
agreed between representatives of the two countries. Under the terms of this convention, Imperial Airways are granted permission to operate with land planes via Milan, Rimini and Brindisi. For a period of one year, Imperial Airways are also permitted to resume operation of the Genoa-Naples-Corfu route with seaplanes, and the permission may be extended for a further period of 12 months. In return an Italian company, nominated by the Italian Government, may operate services to the United Kingdom, Gibraltar, Malta, Cyprus or Aden. This convention requires ratification, but it is proposed that it will remain in force for 10 years; pending ratification, the services can be operated by agreement. The draft of an Anglo-Greek Air Convention has also been agreed between representatives of the two countries, which will permit of operation by Imperial Airways either by the Italy-Corfu-Athens-Alexandria route or by the Mid-Europe route through Salonica to Athens. It is expected, assuming that the London-Egypt service reverts to the Italian route, that the journey between London and Cape Town will ultimately take 10½ days.
A tentative scheme has been prepared for a weekly air mail service between Calcutta and Australia to link up with the existing passenger and mail service between England and India. The scheme has been worked out on the assumption that the stage between Karachi and Calcutta will be operated as an Indian State Service in conjunction with Imperial Airways, Limited. These proposals are now under consideration by the Governments concerned.
The position with regard to the proposed British air services in the West Indies and between the West Indies and Canada is not in as complete a state as we should like to see. The original proposals which I explained to the House last year have now, in view of financial difficulties, been divided into two sections, the first covering West Indian Islands and penetrating into British Guiana, and the second a weekly service between Trinidad and Montreal by way of Bermuda. The present scheme depends upon the co-operation of Canada in view of their interest in the second sec-
tion of the project; negotiations are proceeding and it is hoped that a practical result will ensue.
The past year has seen the end of the 1924 Airship programme. The R.100 completed her acceptance trials on returning from Canada on 16th August, and the R.101 set out on the flight to India—which was to have completed her acceptance trials—on 4th October. It will, of course, be understood that, until there has been time for the report of the Simon Court upon the accident to R.101 to be considered by the Government, any attempt to discuss future airship policy would be premature.
This is not the occasion to say anything of an emotional character in connection with the terrible accident to R.101 in October. The nation was inexpressibly affected, and those of us who were closely associated with the airship venture and the personnel involved, realise that our own poignant feelings could not be put into words, but I cannot let this opportunity pass without saying how much the sympathy, not only of the country in which the accident occurred, but, indeed, of the whole world, has been appreciated. With regard to the French people, that sympathy was added to by the wonderful helpfulness arid kindness shown in connection with all the sad arrangements that had to be made. When the airship left for India the total staff of the Royal Airship Works amounted to 861. I am sorry to say that the immediate result of the accident was to stop all work connected with the airship, and steps were taken to minimise expenditure which might prove nugatory in the light of possible changes in airship policy. This inevitably meant reductions in the staff at Cardington, but, in order to mitigate hardship, it was decided to allocate to the Royal Airship Works at Cardington certain items of work which normally would have gone elsewhere. Until a Cabinet decision is given airship work at Cardington will continue on the minimum basis consistent with maintaining an effective staff, and the provision made in these Estimates will not cover future development work in respect of which supplementary provision would be required.
I have endeavoured to cover the main features accounted for by the Estimates presented to the House and to give hon.
Members some idea of what is happening under Air Ministry control and supervision. Any further particulars that it is in my power to give to the House I shall be happy to give. I think that it will be agreed that, in view of the natural growth of such a young service as the Royal Air Force, and having regard to considerations of efficiency in national defence and the demands also of the great and really vital modern enterprise in civil aviation which must be encouraged—especially at this stage—in every possible way by the Government the slightly increased estimate which I have had the honour to present to the House will be found to be fully justified.

Sir SAMUEL HOARE: My Friends and I on this side of the House associate ourselves with every word the Under-Secretary of State has said about the disaster to R 101. We have already expressed publicly our sympathy with the crew and our sorrow at the loss the country has suffered by the death of these gallant men and by the death of the distinguished Member of the Government, who was the Secretary of State for Air last year when the Estimates were introduced. I say no more to-day than that my Friends on this side and I share in the letter and in the spirit in every word of sympathy and regret that the Under-Secretary has expressed.
Before I deal with the main questions of policy that underlie these Estimates I desire to call the attention of the Under-Secretary of State to what appears to me to be a very serious leakage of Air information. Let me remind the House of the chain of events. I suppose that the question of most interest to hon. Members, in the Air Estimates of this year, is the question of airships, and particularly the report of the commission of the right hon. Member for Spen Valley (Sir J. Simon) upon the R101 disaster. Only on Wednesday my right hon. Friend the Member for South Croydon (Sir W. Mitchell-Thomson) and several other hon. Members on this side asked the Under-Secretary to give an undertaking that the report of the commission of inquiry should be in the hands of hon. Members before the Report stage of these Estimates is finally taken. The Under-Secretary then said that he could not give that undertaking, that the report would probably not be ready in time,
and we were therefore left in the very unsatisfactory position of having the Debate to-day and the Debate upon the Report stage without this really vital document in our hands.
In view of that it is extremely regrettable that to-day we should find upon the front page of the "Daily Herald" detailed account of what this report is supposed to contain. I have never paid too much attention to what appear to be forecasts of official reports when the absence of details shows that they have been put together only as a kind of jigsaw puzzle, with lots of bits of scattered information, by some intelligent newspaper men. But the Under-Secretary of State, if he will look at the report given in the "Daily Herald" to-day, will see that the forecast is much more detailed than any forecast of a more general kind, and any impartial reader of the account in the newspaper will say that the reporter who produced the information and the writer who wrote it up must have had the report in their hands. I shall not weary the House by reading everything that is set out in the "Daily Herald," but if hon. Members will look at the newspaper they will see that detail after detail is given in such a way as to make it quite obvious that the writer of this article must have had the report in his hands. We should like to hear from the Under-Secretary how this leakage has taken place.
I know something of the Air Ministry. I was connected with it for more years than any other hon. Member in this House, and I feel pretty sure that the senior members of the Air Ministry can in no way be responsible for a leakage of this kind. But the matter is too serious to be left there, and I ask the Under-Secretary of State to give an explanation, when he comes to reply, and if he is unable to tell us how this leakage did take place, then to advise the Prime Minister to act as other Prime Ministers have acted in similar circumstances, to put the matter into the hands of the Law Officers of the Crown, to hold an inquiry, and to obtain from the delinquent newspaper the information as to how this leakage took place. If the Under-Secretary will consult precedents he will find in case after case that action of that kind has been taken, and in the interests of every hon. Member it is
action which will be extremely opportune in the present instance.
I now pass to the main questions of policy that underlie the Air Estimates. The Estimates do not produce any new or unexpected features. In substance they differ not at all from the Air Estimates of former years. I take this further opportunity of congratulating the Under Secretary upon continuing without any suggestion of any breach of continuity, the programme of air development, military and civil, that he found in existence when he went to the Air Ministry. I do not rise to criticise the Estimates, nor do I wish to take up the time of the House with a discussion of the details that they contain. I wish to deal rather with the main questions of air policy, of which the details are only a minor and outward expression. Year by year we are steadily proceeding with the development of the Air arm. Whither does this development lead? Year by year we are devoting large sums to a programme of home defence against air attack. What is the policy behind this programme? These are two questions that affect every detail of air administration. These are two questions that control the big expenditure of public funds that we are asked to vote. It is quite easy, in these Estimate Debates, in dealing year after year with the details, to behave like squirrels in a cage, making the regular revolutions, voting the money year after year and getting no nearer to the main principles of policy that are really responsible for our expenditure. To-day I venture to ask hon. Members to consider the two questions that I have just put: First of all the question as to the steady development of the Air arm and whither that development is leading, and, secondly, the question as to what is the policy behind the home defence programme that the Under-Secretary of State has described.
Before I answer those two questions I wish to direct the attention of the House to two very significant facts—two facts to which the Under-Secretary has already drawn attention, but two facts that cannot be too strongly stressed in the course of an Air Estimates Debate. First of all, there is the fact that year by year and almost month by month the destructive power of the Air arm is increase-
ing. Although at the end of the War we believed that we had entered a period of lasting peace, the last 12 years have seen a continuous development of the destructive power of the Air arm. I take an instance from my own experience, and I compare the power of the air arm today with what it was in 1923, the year in which we made the first serious start with the home defence programme and in which I went to the Air Ministry. Since then the speed of bombers has risen by 30 per cent., their ceiling has reached 30,000 feet instead of 15,000 to 20,000 feet, and their bomb sights, once notoriously inaccurate, have become as accurate as naval gunnery was in 1914.
In the case of fighters, the development has been still more spectacular. While the Siskin, the service type in 192.3, was capable of 113 miles an hour and took 11 minutes to climb 15,000 feet, the newer type has a speed of over 200 miles an hour, and can climb to 15,000 feet in little more than seven minutes. The Under-Secretary gave other examples of the great increase in performance. Moreover, in addition to the increase in the performance of the machines and engines, there has been a development in a number of other directions, automatic instruments for instance, gas development and so on. I think everyone in the House will agree that during the last 12 years this increase in the destructive power of the air arm has been spectacular.
I come to the second fact, to which I wish to draw attention. Side by side with the spectacular growth in the destructive power of the air arm, there has been an almost equally spectacular growth in the increase of air expenditure. The Under-Secretary to-day gave us some very startling figures, and I ask hon. Members to pay special attention to them. He told us that with one exception the great countries of the world have been increasing their air expenditure at a startling rate. That one exception is the United Kingdom. Let us all remember the fact when critics would make it appear that we have been half-hearted in the cause of disarmament. After the War we virtually scrapped our Air Force. Did our gesture have the least effect upon any of the other great countries of the world?
5.0 p.m.
Since 1923, as the Under-Secretary of State has just told us, we have actually
reduced our air expenditure by 1 per cent. During that period, nevertheless, the expenditure of France has risen by 139 per cent., the expenditure of the United States of America by 159 per cent., and the expenditure of Italy by 40 per cent. Comparing 1931 with 1930, we have this year, in these Estimates, a small rise of 1 per cent.; the French Estimates have risen 11 per cent., the American 4 per cent., and the Italian 5 per cent. Taking another comparison, I have made a rough calculation that shows that France is spending twice the percentage of her total national expenditure upon air power that we are spending, and the United States and Italy nearly as high a percentage as France.
These facts and figures have several lessons to teach us. They seem to show that as things are in the world to-day, the nations do not regard the Covenant of the League and the Kellogg Pact as sufficiently effective to enable them to make them substitutes for national defence. While I regret that this should be the state of affairs, I cannot say that I am altogether surprised. It has always seemed to me that the statesmen who made these Pacts were looking much too much at the past and not enough to the future. They were thinking of wars in terms of past wars and not of wars in terms of future conditions.
Let me give the House an instance of what I mean. The basis of these international agreements was that there should he a period of time, something in the nature of a moratorium, during which the peacemakers could get to work and during which the methods of conciliation and arbitration could he applied. War, after all, in old days was a comparatively leisurely affair. It took time to mobilise armies; there was time for the diplomats to get to work before wars were actually declared. A moratorium, therefore, was of the greatest possible value, during which the methods of conciliation, negotiation, and arbitration could be applied. But with the coming of the air arm and the new mobility of air warfare, that state of affairs has completely changed, and the conditions of to-day, still more the conditions of the future, are, and will be, as different from the War of 1914, as the War of 1914 was from the Napoleonic Wars of 100 years before.
The House will see from those facts how entirely the coming of the air arm has revolutionised the problem of defence. Excellent as these international pacts may be—and I, for one, will say nothing to disparage their value—they cannot in the present conditions guarantee a country from instantaneous attack, though it may be that they may ensure in the long run ultimate victory; and it is this danger of instantaneous attack that is making the nations of the world, and particularly the nations of Europe, nervous and is necessitating the existence of such schemes of national defence as we have heard described this afternoon. We here, in this country, are in a peculiarly vulnerable position. We have two urgent problems of defence that confront us, much more formidably than they confront any of the other nations of Europe.
We have, first of all, the problem of keeping the country supplied with food and raw materials—a very urgent problem, when it is remembered that we are dependent upon oversea supplies for something like two-thirds of our needs. We also have this other very urgent problem, the problem that our capital, London, the nerve centre of the country, is now within 15 minutes' flight of the Channel, and that the Channel is no longer the protection that it was in the past, with the result that the new ring of Home Defence squadrons is really for us in much the same position as the Channel was to the country 20 or 30 years ago. In view of these facts, the problem then is not whether we must have a Home Defence Force, for I think, from what I have said, that every hon. Member will agree with me that in the present conditions a Home Defence Force is essential, but the question is rather how big that Home Defence Force should be.
The Under-Secretary of State to-day gave us the figures and the present strength of the home defence force. The House will remember that in 1923 the Committee of Imperial Defence had one of the most comprehensive inquiries into our defence problems that has ever taken place in the Committee of Imperial Defence, and out of those inquiries emerged the programme of 52 home defence squadrons. The Under-Secretary of
State told us to-day that, although it was intended to complete that very modest programme of defence in 1930, we are still some years off its final completion. Whilst I have no wish to make in any way an alarmist speech, that is an unsatisfactory state of affairs from the point of view of national defence. The Under Secretary of State has told the House this afternoon that although we have more to lose from air attack than any country in Europe, although we are more vulnerable to air attack than any country in Europe, yet we are only fifth in the list of air Powers. The figures of first-line machines are these: France to-day has 1,320; Italy, 1,100; the United States of America, 1,050; Russia, 1,000; and we only 790. Yet nine years after the starting of this programme, we have still only 42 out of the 52 squadrons, and 13 of those squadrons, as the Under-Secretary of State told us just now, are non-regular.
In view of these facts, what ought to be our attitude when we come to discuss the question of the reduction of air armaments at Geneva at the end of the year? I cannot say too strongly that these discussions which are going to take place at Geneva are of vital importance to this country from every point of view. Taking them at their lowest, if they come to anything, they will react in every direction upon the Air Estimates of the years to come. Let me then in a few sentences suggest to the Under-Secretary of State what ought to be our general attitude to this vital question that in years to come will affect every detail of our air expenditure.
I say, first of all, that, speaking generally and setting aside our Imperial garrisons in oversea parts of the Empire, the strength of our Air Force is relative and not absolute. It is so for this reason, that its strength depends, not upon any absolute needs here, but upon the relative standards of the other Air Forces in Europe. In that respect our Air Force differs from our Army. The strength of our Army, speaking generally, is absolute. It depends upon the needs of the oversea garrisons and the small cadre of an Expeditionary Force that we always keep in being, whereas the strength of the Air Force depends, as
I say, upon the relative strengths of the other Powers of Europe; and I say, as clearly and definitely as I can, that we here have everything to gain by an international reduction of air strengths and by a lowering of these standards, provided we have a standard of parity with other great European Powers. We have everything to gain, in the matter of expense, in the matter of international moral, and in the matter of national safety, by a general lowering of Air Force standards, provided that that reduction is international and that we are left with a standard of parity with the other great European Powers.
Holding that view, I venture to suggest to the Under-Secretary of State, and through him to the Government, that when the Geneva discussions open, they should take a very clear line in favour of this general scaling down of air expenditure and air force in Europe. During the time that I was at the Air Ministry, if I may be pardoned this autobiographical detail, I took a very close interest in the question of the reduction of air armaments. Being there in day-to-day contact with air problems, I could not see without apprehension, without anxiety, the constant development of the destructive power of the air arm and the constant increase of air expenditure over the whole of Europe.
I followed with close interest the preliminary discussions which then took place at Geneva, and I formed the very definite conclusion that if we are to succeed in this very necessary task of scaling down air expenditure over Europe, we must not involve ourselves in these discussions in all sorts and kinds of complicated details. We found in previous discussions that the more complicated the question became, the more details were introduced into it. To take one case in particular, certain Governments wished to introduce into the discussion of this question a large number of matters connected with civil aviation. In theory that might have been an unanswerable course to advocate, but, in practice, it had the effect of complicating the question so greatly that no advance at all was made. Therefore, I suggest to the Under-Secretary of State that he should maintain, as strongly and definitely as he can, the position which has now
been reached at Geneva, namely, that this question should be kept simple, and that in the comparison of categories there should not be all manner of complicated details which no two countries will understand alike, but the simple comparison of first-line machines with their immediate reserves, and with the further test of their horse power. If the hon. Gentleman maintains that simple position, I think we may see some useful pro press made in these discussions.
Secondly, I venture once again to make a suggestion which I have made to him and to the Government on more than one occasion. I believe that if we are to see a scaling-down of air expenditure over Europe, the most effective line of advance is that of agreement between ourselves, the French, and the Italians for air parity. As things are, we are the three great air Powers of Western Europe, and we set the standard of air force and air expenditure. If we could come to a tripartite agreement to scale down these standards, and maintain parity as between Great Britain, France and Italy, we should see a reaction in the right direction in Europe at once, and we should be saved from the certainty of seeing future Air Estimates going up by hundreds of thousands of pounds if not by millions every year.
The Government have recently made a naval agreement between Great Britain, Italy and France. In my view, the air question is more urgent even than the naval question. Now that they have made that naval agreement, I should like to see the Government giving their serious attention to an air agreement, such as I have outlined to the House. By means of an agreement of that kind a practical method would be found of scaling down air expenditure, and of avoiding what we all wish to avoid, namely, a future race in air armaments. I have ventured to deal with this question to-day, and I make no apology to the House for having done so, because it is the main question upon which our air expenditure depends. It is a question which affects every hon. Member in this House to whatever party he belongs. I appeal to the Government with all the force I have not to waste the months before us but to deal with this question on the lines which I have suggested, and to enable us to avoid the possibility of
seeing, in the future, Air Estimates constantly rising, and the great nations of Europe starting a race of air armaments.

Marquess of CLYDESDALE: I understand it is customary when beginning a maiden speech to crave the indulgence of the House, and I further understand that the House is considerate enough to give such indulgence, and that interruptions are, to say the least of it, restrained on such occasions. I assure you, Sir, and I should like to assure the House, that I require all the indulgence I can get. On the other hand, I feel that speaking under privileged conditions is always difficult and has certain disadvantages which every Member experiences when he rises to undergo the somewhat nerve-racking ordeal of speaking for the first time in this Chamber.
I should like in the first place to congratulate the Under-Secretary of State for Air on the able way in which he has laid the Air Estimates before the House. Considering the unsettled economic conditions with which the country is faced, I can only regard these Air Estimates as very satisfactory. Without intending to criticise them unduly, I should like, however, to make certain observations upon them. I think it is rather disappointing that there has been no increase in the number of flying-boat units. I consider that flying boats are playing an increasingly important part, not only in linking this country more closely with the rest of the Empire, but also in bringing this country and foreign countries more closely together in better understanding and friendship. I am fully conscious of the fact that flying boats are expensive in comparison with aeroplanes, but I consider that the expenditure upon them would be fully justified.
I understand that three additional squadrons are to be added to the Home Defence Force, and, in view of the state of international armaments at the present time, I think the Under-Secretary is to be congratulated on that decision. It is, however, a pity that there has been no increase in the number of non-regular units of the Air Force. I should like to say something about these non-regular units, and especially the Auxiliary Air Force, from the point of view of economy. I asked the Under-Secretary the other day for figures showing the difference in cost to the Air Ministry between an
Auxiliary Air Force squadron, and a regular squadron of the same type. His figures, which I think be said were only rough figures, showed approximately that an auxiliary squadron cost half as much to maintain as a regular squadron. That means to say that if three non-regular squadrons had been added to the Home Defence Force, instead of three regular squadrons, the cost to the State would have been halved, or, on the other hand, it would have been possible, for the same cost, to have added six non-regular squadrons instead of three regular squadrons to the Home Defence Force.
As one holding a commission in an Auxiliary Air Force unit, it is not for me to eulogise the efficiency or the work of that Force. The Under-Secretary has already done so—in introducing the Air Estimates last year—and reference is made to the high standard of general efficiency in this Force, in the Memorandum which accompanies these Estimates. But in speaking of the non-regular units in relation to economy, it is necessary that I should make some reference to the relative efficiency of the auxiliary and the regular squadrons. In passing, may I say that I am in no wise depreciating the standard of efficiency of the regular squadrons. I, personally, have seen a great deal of their work, and I have the highest admiration for the manner in which they perform their duties. I am greatly impressed with the ability of individual regular officers and airmen, but I should like to make it clear that the Auxiliary Air Force in its work, in its efficiency, in its training, comes much nearer to, and is more akin to the regular Royal Air Force than, for instance, the Territorial Army is to the Regular Army, or the auxiliary units of the Royal Navy are to the Royal Navy itself. In some ways, Auxiliary Air Force units have an advantage and ought, in fact, to be even more efficient than regular units. The reason is that the personnel of the Auxiliary Air Force unit generally live in the same locality and know each other. They are accustomed to working together, and consequently there exists in the auxiliary unit a very high degree of what may be termed the team spirit which is such an asset. The regular squadrons cannot have that team spirit in the same degree.
I do not wish to be misunderstood. I am not in any way criticising the policy of the Air Council in constantly posting and re-posting regular personnel from one unit to another. No doubt, that policy makes the service, as a whole, more efficient, but it cannot result in that degree of team spirit which found in auxiliary units. To offset that advantage which is enjoyed by the Auxiliary Air Force, the regular Air Force has the obvious advantage of a more highly trained personnel. At the same time the established Auxiliary Air Force squadrons—I refer to those which were created more than three years ago, because it takes at least two or three years for such squadrons to develop—are pretty well up to full fighting strength and have shown that they are fully capable of working satisfactorily with, and competing satisfactorily with Regular units. Anyone who was at the Royal Air Force display at Hendon may remember that an Auxiliary Air Force squadron—not one particularly chosen from the Force for that purpose—went through various formation exercises which were well up to the high standard associated with that annual display.
I have spoken about the Auxiliary Air Force, because I believe that by increasing these units it is possible effectively to add to the Home Defence Force at a comparatively cheap cost. I realise that there are difficulties in the way; that it is, for instance, more difficult to establish an Auxiliary Air Force squadron than a Regular squadron, and that the allocation of squadrons is an important feature contributing to their success. I would urge the Under-Secretary of State to do all that he can, in the interests of economy alone, to establish more of these non-Regular units.
I wish to refer to civil aviation in Scotland, which lags behind England in flying matters. That may be a rather unusual statement to make. The reason is not that it always rains in Scotland. I think that I can claim that I have flown in an aeroplane in Scotland more than any other Member of the House, and I can assure the House that, if we get our share of rain, we have longer days in the summer and are therefore able to fly longer. I do not think that it is a case of lack of interest or
enthusiasm among Scottish people for they have shown marked enthusiasm and interest in what little flying goes on in Scotland. In fact, the Scottish Flying Club financially is one of the most successful flying clubs in the United Kingdom. The reason for the lag is that people in Scotland have had very little opportunity of knowing anything about flying. They do not realise what an aeroplane is capable of, what it can and cannot do, and to what uses it can be put. Is it not possible for the Air Ministry to give more help and encouragement? I realise the importance of keeping the Royal Air Force and civil aviation segregated, but at the same time, the Royal Air Force should and does to a certain extent set the lead to aviation throughout the country. At various meetings that were held in England last year, regular squadrons gave displays of aerobatics and so forth. No Service machine has helped at aviation meetings in Scotland, and such help is very much required.
Last year a big aviation meeting was held at Renfrew, and it was watched by approximately between 50,000 and 60,000 people. An air liner of the Imperial Airways flew from London to Scotland, and one of the passengers was the Prime Minister. Although there was this vast crowd, no help was given to the meeting from Service machines, although such machines were available. That was a lost opportunity. This year another big meeting is to be held on three consecutive days—the 5th, 6th and 7th of June—and I ask the Under-Secretary of State if it would not be possible for permission to be given for the Service to help. They could help in two ways, which would involve a negligible amount of expenditure. Permission could be given for a fighter squadron to give a display of aerobatics; I do not advocate that any warlike displays should be given, but a display of aerobatics would be a great advantage, and the meeting would thoroughly justify such permission being given. The Air Ministry could help also by giving permission to various types of Royal Air Force machines to be flown over from neighbouring aerodromes, so that an air park could be formed. This would greatly add to the interest of the meeting. I have said this
because encouragement is badly needed in the north where aviation is less advanced than in England. I ask the Under-Secretary of State to do what he can to give us encouragement, and not to forget Scotland. Whatever encouragement he gives will be met with ample enthusiasm and response.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: It gives us great pleasure to be able to congratulate the Noble Lord who has just spoken. He has made an admirable maiden speech, which was full of that fighting persistency for which he is so distinguished in another sphere. He told us that Scotland lags behind England in aviation, but he may take consolation from the fact that that is the only respect in which Scotland falls short of the standard set by this country. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Chelsea (Sir S. Hoare) that it is possible to admire the way in which the Under-Secretary of State touched on many detailed points, while regretting that he made no clear and concise statement of our general policy. Like most laymen, I find myself in some confusion when I listen to speeches upon the Air Estimates from the Government Front Bench, and still more when I read those memoranda that accompany the Estimates. We are shown a great number of diversified activities. We are told a little about research, a little about training pilots, and something about long-distance flights and air routes; we are even treated to some aspects of meteorology; but 'as regards the real central policy we are told very little.
The hon. Gentleman explained that he did not intend to enter into competition with any foreign Powers, and at the same time that he intended to proceed slowly and gradually with Home Defence. What is Home Defence if it has no reference whatever to what foreign Powers are doing? What I want to know from the hon. Gentleman, who always speaks with such charm and ease, is whether he regards the Air Force as an instrument of war or as something else? If something else, as what? If the Air Force is to be regarded as an instrument of war, it is an inadequate force, judging from the figures which the hon. Gentleman gave. How inadequate it is may be illustrated from the size which it attained
during the War, as compared with its present dimensions, and comparing what it did in the War with what it is doing now. In one war year we constructed 34,000 machines. Is the hon. Gentleman's Department constructing more than 1,000 now? We trained 8,000 pilots in one year during the War. Is the Air Ministry training more than 500? We spent £150,000,000 on aviation contracts then. Is the hon. Gentleman spending as much as £5,000,000? It is quite obvious that if the Royal Air Force is intended to be an instrument of war, it is not fulfilling its purpose and the Department is really playing with children's catapults. You cannot afford to keep an air force as an inefficient instrument of war.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Chelsea, after having claimed parentage of the policy that is being pursued, drew an alarming picture of how we were lagging behind foreign Powers. We cannot catch up to foreign Powers, and, even if we could, what would it avail if the ascendancy of the British Empire depended upon the air? That position which we have gained by sea supremacy would be for ever abandoned. No Power can gain ascendancy in the air; the element is not suitable for that purpose. Therefore, I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it is ridiculous of him to maintain that we should build up a one-Power standard. If that is to be our standard, and we are not successful in attaining a reduction in French building, we shall have to increase our programme and the cost of it to a size which the taxpayers in this country will never support.
What is the alternative if we cannot acquire air ascendancy? The alternative is to spend more money on the peace possibilities of the Royal Air Force. It is a disconcerting feature of these Estimates year by year that only about one-fortieth of the money spent goes to peace and commercial activities. Our grants to civil aviation are only about £500,000, as compared with a total expenditure of £20,000,000, and it always will be so as long as these peace activities are under a war department. The aircraft industry is the best of all industries upon which to spend money. It is the industry of the future, the industry which will level the economic barriers
between nations, and if we divert into war channels the money that ought to go to developing this great industry on peaceful grounds we are failing to take advantage of the most hopeful medium for the peace of the world. If we have an adequate air industry, with an adequate number of trained pilots, we can at any moment transform it into a war industry, if that should be required, and there is, therefore, every advantage in abandoning any struggle to maintain a warlike equality with foreign Powers in favour of a course which will draw the Empire more closely together and pacify the world with greater promptitude than it is being pacified at the moment.
The hon. Gentleman tells us in his memorandum that his policy is to go to Geneva in the earnest hope that the forthcoming Disarmament Conference will bring about a general reduction in air armaments and remove the present serious disparity between the Royal Air Force and foreign air services. I advise the Government not to bother about Geneva. Already we are far too dependent upon Geneva, and if we fix a standard at Geneva we may have to build up to it rather than build down to it. We do not want to take our policy from Geneva, but to conceive it ourselves, and that policy should be the development of the peace pursuits of the air. The hon. Gentleman should hand over to the Board of Trade the civil aspect of his duties, which would then be in charge of a department which could properly exercise them. If he is always to be reproached for not building up to the French standard, then the money will, of course, be diverted from civil to military purposes. I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that other nations should be left to follow the eagles and that we should follow the doves.

Mr. MATTERS: I would like to join with the hon. Member for Devonport (Mr. Hore-Belisha) in tendering my personal congratulations to the Noble Lord who made his maiden speech this afternoon, and to say that many of us, not so young in years, but feeling just as young in experience, would have been glad to make such a speech at our second or third effort. I also wish to congratulate the Under-Secretary for Air upon the very lucid and detailed statement which he presented to the House this afternoon. I
was pleased to hear him say that the work of the Aeronautical Inspection Department had resulted in the laying down or the maintenance of a, standard in aircraft construction which is, without doubt, unrivalled in the world. The evidence coming from all countries shows that the British aeroplane is recognised as without equal on the part of any other nation which is engaged in the same industry. That same observation applies, so far as my investigations go, to the high standard of the training of our aviators. It may be of passing interest to say that, quite recently, though an American aircraft was used in a flight from the great city of Buenos Aires to Asuncion in Paraguay, the aviator chosen by the American Commission who were dealing with a political trouble between the Republics of Paraguay and Bolivia was an English-trained young Argentine.
It has often occurred to me that it would be wise policy to take into our training schools in aeronautics a much larger proportion of young aviators from Australia, from South America, and, indeed, from all foreign countries. Those young aviators, trained in British methods, would inevitably show a natural desire later to fly in British made machines, and that would be one way in which the export side of our aicraft industry could be considerably strengthened. I do not want to say anything this afternoon about the military side of the service or the Ministry. I have to confess that I have no personal interest in the fate or the future of the military side of the Under-Secretary's activities, but am more concerned with the development of the civil aviation side, and I am inclined to agree with the hon. Member for Devonport that we would be fortunate if, by either setting the example ourselves or by agreement at Geneva, we were able to devote the major part of our energy and our expenditure to the development of civil flying rather than military aviation.
One very important aspect of the development of civil aviation in this country to which I would like to draw attention concerns the provision of municipal aerodromes. It is probably within the knowledge of hon. Members that the Aerodromes Committee appointed by the Royal Institute of British Architects issued its first interim report yesterday.
Fairly extensive references to it will be found in the Press to-day. That Committee has stated that if we are to develop civil aviation in this country as it should be developed within the next 10 or 20 years we must face up at once to the problem of providing landing places or aerodromes at intervals of no more than 20 miles. I believe that expert opinion in the United States holds that the intervals should not exceed 10 miles. There may be technical points for discussion about that difference, but I do not think there will be any dispute about the necessity for the provision of municipal aerodromes. In my judgment it ought to be taken for granted that if we are to develop a great system of internal air transport for passengers and mails we must primarily provide the necessary aerodromes, and quite obviously they must be in as close proximity as possible to the large towns and cities. The Civil Aviation Department of the Air Ministry has, I understand, been giving attention to this problem for a considerable number of years. I think it entered upon a very active propaganda campaign in 1928, and approached most of the local authorities, chambers of commerce, and similar bodies to enlist their interest in the provision of municipal aerodromes.
Some considerable measure of success followed their activities, but obviously not a sufficient measure. Eight of our great provincial cities already possess aerodromes licensed by the Air Ministry as suitable for civil aviation purposes—Blackpool, Bristol, Hull, Ipswich, Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham and Plymouth. In addition, 18 other towns and cities are at this moment negotiating for sites for municipal aerodromes. Twelve other authorities have reserved sites in their own town-planning schemes, and of 126 other local authorities it can be said that they have taken some active, though not necessarily definite, steps towards meeting this demand. I am given to understand that as a programme suitable for the development of our domestic—if I may use that term—needs in air transport within the next 10 or 20 years we shall require at least 400 of these aerodromes scattered throughout the country, obviously as close as possible to the large towns and provincial cities. The figures I have just given show that so far only 164 local authorities are definitely and
directly interested and have made any measure of response to the promptings or initiative of the Civil Aviation Branch of the Air Ministry.
6.0 p.m.
A much faster rate of progress is needed. Reservation or actual purchase of sites for aerodromes does not mean that the aerodromes themselves must be complete. The ground is chosen, from certain technical aspects, but possibly it still requires levelling and other improvements, and, later, the provision of extensive hangars, and so forth. Municipal authorities are not at this moment being asked to undertake that expense. The sole object of the moment on the part of the Civil Aviation Branch is to get them to reserve or to purchase the site, and there are many very good reasons why they should do so without delay. The minimum area of an aerodrome or a site suitable to be licensed by the Ministry is approximately 75 acres, but I gather that the Ministry rather urges that the minimum should be from 150 to 200 acres. That means an area of ground with measurements ranging from 800 to 1,000 yards—quite a substantial area near a great city or a provincial town. If action be taken now, it is extremely probable that such sites can be secured at a reasonable rate. Those of us who are familiar with the great problem of housing know that the local authorities already have their hands full and their shoulders heavily laden in attempting to secure the areas of land necessary for housing. On the top of all that the local authorities are being asked to secure aerodrome sites for the Ministry of Air, and on this matter, if action is to be taken, it should be taken at once. I have in mind the case of one local authority entering into negotiations for the purchase of a municipal aerodrome site at the price of £90 per acre, and yet when steps were being taken to buy that land the price went up to £200 per acre. That is the usual effect in regard to the price of land when it is known that a certain site is required for an aerodrome, and, therefore, there should be no delay in these matters on the part of the local authorities.
Another very important question about which we have heard many complaints is the danger to which aviators are ex-
posed from high-power electric cables. If the local authorities will make their reservations now and choose their sites, after consultation with the Electricity Commissioners and the Air Ministry, all those difficulties can be avoided. I believe that it would be a relatively simple thing for the Electricity Commissioners, in laying out their great schemes, to avoid those sites which have been earmarked for civil aviation, and so avoid later on all the difficulty and trouble which arise where these high-power electric cables block the approaches to an aerodrome. In conclusion, I wish to stress once more the importance of this particular issue, and if we are to secure a full development and a relatively speedy development of air transport in this country, it is most essential that the local authorities should begin at once actively to co-operate with the civil aviation branch of the Air Ministry to earmark, reserve, or actually purchase the best sites which ultimately will be very badly needed if we wish to keep pace with developments in other countries, and more particularly in Germany, which is far ahead of the provision we have made for ourselves.

Captain HAROLD BALFOUR: I would like at the outset to compliment the Noble Lord the Member for East Renfrew (Marquess of Clydesdale) on the very interesting maiden speech which he has delivered. I also wish to congratulate the Under-Secretary of State for Air upon introducing these Estimates in a speech which was full of interesting information. The Under-Secretary was, however, very reticent about the future policy of the Air Force as regards its development, and I do not think that there has been a more reticent speech introducing the Air Estimates for many years past. There was in that speech a great deal of interesting and informative technical data, but what the majority of Members of this House wanted to hear was what is going to happen in regard to the policy of the Air Ministry, about which the Under-Secretary said very little.
The Air Estimates are satisfactory from two points of view. We know that the exchequer is empty, or possibly more than empty. We know that the Army and the Navy Estimates are down and the Air Estimates are slightly up, and
that shows that the whole problem of defence is now being regarded by the Government as one whole problem, and not as the perquisite of the older forces, which have always looked upon the air as an enfant terrible. A second ground which is satisfactory is that by the increases and from the information given in the Memorandum issued by the Secretary of State it is shown that the policy initiated by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Epping (Mr. Churchill) in 1922 at the Cairo Conference has been fully justified. Hitherto this question of defence has generally been approached with an attitude of jealousy amongst the three forces. Whenever this new arm has come into use it has first been told that certain things cannot be done, and then when it has proved that they can be done, it has been held that that must not do it because air action is brutal. It is then proved that air action is probably the most humane method of warfare.
Finally, the Air Force is told that if the task has to be done, the other services must themselves do it. This attitude is dying slowly, but I noticed the other day that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Molton (Mr. Lambert) animadverted on what he called the dual control of aircraft working with the Fleet, and I was distressed to hear the First Lord of the Admiralty, in replying to the Debate on the Navy Estimates, say that he had had a grouse about this matter, but he should say very little about it. I feel that it is of the utmost importance that the unity of the Air Force should be maintained in regard to our defence. The idea of having a separate naval and military air service in addition to an independent air service could only lead to overlapping and inefficiency, for it would be most detrimental to weaken in any shape or form the present control of the Air Ministry over the Fleet Air arm. I think rather the control of the Air Ministry should be strengthened, and in saying that I am not expressing an isolated opinion. I would ask the Under-Secretary if, in replying to the Debate, he would say whether it was not a fact that in 1925 a committee was appointed to examine most exhaustively this question of Army, Navy and Air expenditure, and whether the result of the recommenda-
tions of that committee was not that the Air Ministry should have an increased power and an increase in the whole administration of Fleet Air arm personnel. I have never been able to understand, and I hope the Under-Secretary will tell us how it is that the report of this authoritative committee consisting of Lord Chalmers, Lord Bradbury and Lord Colwyn was more or less suppressed and not acted upon. I think it is rather by having greater control by the Air Ministry and adopting some of the recommendations of that committee that economy and efficiency can be more fully effected.
The question has been raised as to whether we can afford to be a first-class Air Power. We must not judge this question from the point of view as to whether it is necessary to spend more money on the Air Force to bring it up in numbers to the strength of the Air Forces of other countries, but we should look at the whole defence problem of this country as compared with the defence problem of other countries. It may be that by cutting down the expenses of the older services and applying some of the economies to the Air service in the way of increased grants, we may get a stronger defence force. With regard to the Royal Air Force, those who have done service in it may possibly know more about the matters than other Members, but there are certain things concerning the Royal Air Force which should be said to-night, and I should not be doing my duty to my constituents, some of whom are Royal Air Force personnel, if I did not state certain things to the House. The Memorandum which has been issued by the Air Ministry, shows the economy which has been secured in the Air Force over a period of years, and it also states that the Air Force is doing greater work than it was doing in 1925 and at less cost.
The limits of efficiency and economy, and even of safety, have now keen reached in some parts of the Royal Air Force. There is a policy of economy. Economy is always desirable, but when it is economy at the expense of units, when active flying units are short of establishment in skilled men, then it is an economy at the expense of the efficiency of those units. Again, with regard to the question of
economy in pilots, I submit that the pilots in certain units of the Royal Air Force at the present time are definitely overworked, and that is a definite result of this policy of economy. The Minister has his advisers near him, and I would challenge him on this statement; and if he denies the statement that I am about to make, I will give him chapter and verse in regard to the units concerned. There is in this country a flying training school where flying has had to be carried out on Saturday afternoons and Sundays in order to allow that unit to turn out the number of pupils that it is expected to turn out. That is a definite overworking of instructors and of mechanics, and I do not think that economy at that cost is real and genuine economy such as this House desires to see in the service. Again, there is an Army Co-operation Unit, which has certain pilots, and I know that those pilots have worked all day with the troops, merely coming down to fill up their machines and for one hour for lunch. No pilot should be expected to fly from dawn to dusk continuously for any number of days. That may be economy in pounds, shillings and pence for the moment, but it is not the economy, I am sure, for which the House is looking.
I see from the Memorandum that there is going to be a reorganisation in the Royal Air Force home establishment, so that there shall be one flying training school less; Netheravon is to be closed down. I would like the Minister to give an assurance to the House that the state of affairs which I have mentioned in another flying school will not be allowed to get worse as the result of this reorganisation and the closing down of one of the schools in England. One would be happier still if the Minister would give an undertaking that the matter of these pilots at flying training schools will be looked into, in order to see that instructors are not expected to do more than any pilot reasonably can do. I would suggest that there should be introduced into the curriculum of the Royal Air Force some system of compulsory athletics, counting as duty hours, on at any rate one afternoon in the week, if physical fitness is to be reckoned as an essential factor to be possessed by every officer or non-commissioned officer who is a pilot.
The Royal Air Force can rightly be proud of its record in regard to flying hours and in regard to accidents, and it compares more than favourably with any other service in the world, but there is a line of connection between accidents and overwork and tired brains. That line has not been made yet, and I trust it never will be made. It is a line which we ought never to allow to be made. We must watch that very carefully, and in the future, if ever the Royal Air Force had an unfortunate run of luck and a series of bad accidents, this House would be entitled, and every Member of every party in this House would be entitled, to see whether such a line between tired brains and accidents could be connected; and, if that line could be established, then those in charge of the Department responsible to this House would have to be held responsible for that state of affairs.
We have the finest pilots and the finest equipment in the world, and it is up to every Member of this House who takes an interest in the Royal Air Force to put forward his contribution in regard to seeing that justice is done by this House to those who are in the Royal Air Force. There is one thing which is vital in the Service, and that is confidence, and, if the confidence of those in the ranks of the flying service is ever shattered, the whole moral of the Service goes by the board. I ask the Under-Secretary of State to say that, in this reorganisation scheme for the flying training system, and the reduction of one school, this factor will be taken into consideration, and that the present state of affairs will not, be allowed to become worse, but will be remedied in the future.
I want now to turn to the question of civil aviation, particularly in connection with accidents. In another place, the Secretary of State for Air dealt last week with the question of accidents, and announced that the findings of the inquiries of the Accidents Investigation Branch into accidents to passenger-carrying machines will in future be published. Everyone in this House who has striven for the publication of information which we feel is necessary for the public confidence in air transit, namely, information as to the causes of accidents, will feel grateful to the Secretary of State, the Under-Secretary of State, and
the Government for having taken that decision. But, beyond that good decision, it is difficult to see how we are progressing in civil aviation. My right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Ripon (Major Hills), who is, I think, going to speak later in the Debate, is, I know, somewhat a supporter of the policy of the "tied house"—the Government tied to Imperial Airways, and Imperial Airways tied to the Government. Under that system, however, there is no incentive to speed up the development of civil aviation; there is no incentive to review progress; and there is no incentive to enable people to say, "We have made a mistake in our commencing development, and now we must start afresh." The only incentive which the Government have is to stand by Imperial Airways, and the only incentive which Imperial Airways have in the matter is to make a "safety first" service. That is very desirable as the first item, but progress should be the second, and one must not always forget the second.
I think that we have possibly made an entirely wrong start in civil aviation by trying to run from London to Paris and from London to India carrying passengers. After all, directly you carry passengers, you increase your responsibilities. The human passenger is the most expensive form of freight that you can carry. You have to provide appliances, you have to provide facilities, and you have to provide a useful pay load for the machine, with trimmings like upholstery and one thing and another. The carrying of passengers is not economical, and I would prefer to see a service of commercial aviation developed carrying, firstly, air mails, and, secondly, goods. What I have just stated with regard to the negative results of the present policy of Imperial Airways is illustrated by the fact that, for the last 12 months or more, mail has been coming into Croydon Air Port every night, or at all events on several nights a week, from Scandinavia by a Belgian machine, and not one letter has gone out from England during all of those months. We should undoubtedly follow the example of our continental rivals in civil aviation, and develop this system of night carrying of air mails.
It takes three weeks for a letter to reach Australia from this country. If we could reduce that period to one week, we should speed up the whole business of this country; we should speed up the whole trade between this country and the Dominions; money would be saved which is at present dead while it is in transit from one country to another; and we should also be able to carry precious freight which is now shipped, and which takes three weeks for the voyage. We should speed up the whole industry of the country. Anyone who studies industry knows that there is a ratio of plant value to output. Supposing that the ratio of turnover to plant is as four to one at present, if you could speed up the wheels of industry so as to increase that ratio of output to plant, looking at this country as a national industry, then you would increase the efficiency of your business. That, I think, is the object of civil aviation. Under our present system, all civil aircraft are out of operation for 16 hours out of the 24; the average time of flight is eight hours per day. I cannot see why a night mail service should not be started in the near future between this country and India, and between this country and Australia, if we would realise that the capital expenditure involved in lighting and organising the route is something which must not be reckoned as a capital investment for that service only, but as a capital investment for the whole country.
I repeat that, as regards civil aviation, we are starting at the wrong end in carrying passengers instead of freight. Light aeroplane clubs are excellent, but we ought to go beyond light aeroplane clubs—we ought to start with gliding. If we could in this country increase the democratic interest of the mass of the people in flying—and, after all, we cannot impose a new industry or a new art on people unless they are receptive, and wish to receive that new art or new industry—if we can get them interested, then the thing will go ahead with the national good will behind it. A light aeroplane is very much out of the reach of most average citizens of this country, and even joining a light aeroplane club is somewhat out of their reach, but modern motorless flying is not out of their reach. Germany, I think, gave last year a subsidy of £16,000 for motorless
flying; France has given £6,000 for motorless flying; and if we could spare a small contribution of money for this system of motorless flying, I believe we should lay the foundations, on the widest possible basis, for building up a national interest and pride in aviation.
In every new age there is one new development. We had the iron ship, we had the steam engine, and we had the internal combustion automobile engine, though we gave that away to America. We are the leading shipbuilders of the world; we are the leading steam engine builders of the world. There is just one new chance in every age and generation, and our chance in this generation is to be the leading country in air matters. This is a matter which is so vital that I trust it will never become a counter of party politics. It is a matter for which any Government of any party is vitally responsible, because the Government have in their power the furthering of the greatest gift which this House can give, and that is the gift of development and progress to future generations.

Rear-Admiral SUETER: I should like to congratulate the Under-Secretary of State for Air on the very able way in which he has put forward his Estimates this year. He says that he is not a technical man, but he placed technical matters before the House exceedingly well, and we are very grateful to him. I was much interested in what he told us about the increases in the Air Forces of other Powers, and I do think that we should really expand up to the number of squadrons approved for home defence as quickly as possible. We are on too low a scale at the present time. The Under-Secretary's remarks about the working of our Air Force on the North-West Frontier of India were very interesting, and I think he might tell us also a little about what has happened at Aden. About two years ago we took over the responsibility for air control at Aden, and it would be very interesting to hear how that experiment has been carried out. I noticed in the Press a short time ago a very fine letter from Sir Henry Dobbs, praising the work of the Royal Air Force in Iraq, and I think that some hon. Members opposite who are always running down the work of the Air Service would do well to read that fine
appreciation by Sir Henry Dobbs, and his explanation of the fact that they do not bomb these hostile raiding tribes unless they are compelled to do so, and then they give them very good warning. There was a very fine complimentary letter from the Air Force appreciating his good work very much indeed.
I should like to ask if the Farnborough experimental staff are going into the question of developing the Autogyro, and how that type of aircraft is getting on. I notice that there is again an increase in the money allowed to Farnborough, and we ought to have an assurance that it is well expended. I see they are reorganising Farnborough, and we should like to know something of the details of that reorganisation. The Under-Secretary tells us of the progress made by Imperial Airways on the Cape to Cairo air route and also in the West Indies, and he touched upon Singapore. I hope that those air routes will be speeded up. I did not quite understand when he mentioned Malta and Gibraltar and an Italian Convention that was going to be signed. Do I understand that the Italians are to run an air service to Malta and Gibraltar? If so, I am sure we should like to know whether we are working up Malta into a first-class air base, and how we are to protect these large seaplanes of the boat type when they land on the water there in very heavy weather? It was suggested a short time ago that a breakwater should be built across one of the harbours, and the late Air Minister said it would cost something like £15,000,000. I believe that sum has now been whittled down to some £3,500,000. I should like the Under-Secretary to tell us whether anything has been done in that direction to develop Malta as a first-class seaplane base so that flying boats can land there in safety?
I should like to say a word about the Schneider Trophy. I was very glad that the Government saw their way to give help for the race this year, and we all appreciate Lady Houston's great generosity in coming forward with that magnificent sum of money to enable that race to be carried out. Her husband used to sit on the lower bench below the Gangway next to me some years ago. He always took an interest in our air Debates, and we are very grateful that some of his money can be used to advance the cause of the Schneider Cup race. It
has done an immense amount of good in the past. It has helped us to increase the speed for many years of our aeroplanes and it also brings good orders from foreign countries, because it raises the whole prestige of our aeronautical industry, particularly when we win the race.
The Under-Secretary touched upon the very fine work of the technical staff—I know they do good work—and he said they continually went in for very fine inspection, and did everything they could to minimise accidents. I know the Aircraft Inspection Department have some exceedingly splendid men. When machines are turned over to the Service, I understand the inspection comes under the commanding officer of the station, and he is responsible to see that they are perfectly airworthy. For years I have asked the Ministry to establish an engineering staff of skilled men so as to have a trained engineer at all these aerodromes. I have never had much support for that. I saw the other day that a report was issued by the British Science Guild, of which Sir Richard Redmayne is the chairman. He dealt with certain points in connection with the Navy and the Army and went on to say, dealing with the Air Force:
The report states that the absence in the organisation of the Air Ministry of an officer with qualifications and duties similar to those of the engineer chief of the Fleet is a distinct source of weakness and must make the Ministry dependent in relation to matters affecting the construction of aeroplanes and their engines on those engaged in the industry connected with aeronautics to a greater extent than is desirable from the point of view of national efficiency.
I think we ought to establish in the Air Force an engineer chief with expert engineers in exactly the same way as we have in the Navy. The Under-Secretary says that we very seldom get an accident by aircraft breaking in the air or any engine defects. But there may be one or two accidents from that cause and, if you have these very skilled technical people, it might prevent some of them. We are told that sometimes the vision is not very good and an aeroplane goes into a telegraph post. There was an accident the other day with a boat type of seaplane at Plymouth. I understand that the pilot did not quite appreciate that he was so near the sea. He had a
very big smash and most of them were killed. There are many accidents that one could name, and I want to ask the Under-Secretary whether he is going to do something to try to reduce them. There are far too many. There is all this research work going on. Is the knowledge that is gained by it imparted to the proper people? I saw in the technical Press the other day that the Americans say we have 70 per cent. more accidents in the Royal Air Force than they have in their army and naval work. That is a tremendous amount. There must be something wrong if we have all these accidents and they do not have so many.
I would like to ask the Under-Secretary whether we could not have an international conference in London composed of civil experts and army and navy flying experts from all the nations that fly, to thrash out all the causes of these accidents. Italy the other day sent a very fine fleet of 12 machines to South America. It won the admiration of the whole country. It was a very fine flight, and they must have had great experience of landing seaplanes. We might be able to get something from them and something from the United States. I know there was an Air Safety Conference last year in Paris at which we were not represented very well. Could not the hon. Gentleman get the approval of the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister to summon an international conference in exactly the same way as we had an international conference for the safety of life at sea in 1929? I feel certain that something might be done to prevent some of these accidents. After all, all the nations of the world want to prevent their flying men from being killed, if they possibly can, in peace time.
I understand there has been an international conference sitting for some years on third-party policies, and I should like to know if any decision has been come to. It is a very intricate matter. A machine recently fell on a house at Brixton, and another came down in another part of the country and the petrol tanks went all over a house. That ought to be gone into to see exactly the position of third parties. It is very important that third-party policies should be put on a proper footing. The insurance companies ought to be companies of
some repute, and the Government ought to guarantee that they are good companies, particularly when foreign machines come over here. Perhaps the Under-secretary would tell us exactly the position.
I associate myself with all that he said about the loss of those gallant people in R 101. Many of them I trained in the Royal Naval Air Service, and they were most efficient. I am sorry indeed that that leakage in the Press has come out, and I think the Prime Minister ought to contradict it if it is not accurate. It is most unfortunate that the impression should be raised that there has been leakage going on with regard to that report. I hope we shall have an opportunity of discussing the disaster on another occasion.

Sir PHILIP SASSOON: I do not know whether it is true, as the Noble Lord has told us, that Scotland has lagged behind England in the matter of flying. If it is so, it certainly is not his fault, because there is no private individual that I know of who has done more for flying than he has. I should like to associate myself with the very admirable maiden speech which he made to-day, and which appealed to the House so much. I associate myself with everything he said in the matter of auxiliary squadrons. Like him, I was very glad to see the well-merited tribute that was paid by the Secretary of State in his memorandum to the quality and the general efficiency of the reserve and auxiliary forces. No praise could be more thoroughly deserved. I am also in the fortunate position of being a member of an auxiliary squadron, and I, therefore, know from personal knowledge of the quite remarkable keenness of the officers and men of those squadrons. Drawn, as they are, from many different forms of civil occupation, they have a common interest and a common bond in doing everything they can to promote the efficiency of those units. Their service entails a considerable sacrifice of time and leisure, and demands a real love of flying and a real pride in the reputation of the units to which they belong. In the annual air exercises the auxiliary squadrons not only took their part with the regular squadrons, but showed up ex-
tremely well, and no higher praise can be given than that. These squadrons have done so well in the air exercises that I feel justified in pressing once again this year for the formation of auxiliary seaplane squadrons. I am convinced that an experimental squadron of this sort based on Southampton, for instance, and operating, say, from Lee-on-Solent or from Calshot, would draw many recruits, and there is certainly admirable material to be drawn upon in that part of the world. Such a squadron, I am sure, would soon reach to that high standard of efficiency which is shown by the land squadrons.
I should like to see, generally, a great deal more money spent upon flying boats, not only in the way that I have indicated, but also in increasing the air strength of a branch of the Air arm which I have always thought was peculiar suited to the needs of our Empire. If future policy should lead to a saving in money previously spent upon airships, I do not think that some of that money could possibly be better spent than in developing multi-engined, long distance flying boats, and in the formation of auxiliary flying boat squadrons. Personally, I think that the auxiliary squadrons should be preferred to the cadre squadrons. There is a corporate spirit, a consciousness of individual existence as a unit, about the auxiliary squadron, which is absent from the cadre squadron. The reason for that is quite simple, because in the cadre squadrons the regular element is not large enough to permit of the formation of the squadron spirit comparable with that which exists in the regular squadrons. On the other hand, it is too large to allow of the formation of a corps spirit among the non-regular personnel. So that, to my mind, the cadre squadron is inclined to fall between two stools. I know that originally the intention was that the cadre squadrons should be in greater numbers than the auxiliary squadrons, but there are more auxiliary squadrons in existence to-day than there are cadre squadrons. I am very glad to see it, because, I think, that is the right way along which this movement should develop.
There is less room for congratulation when we look at the strength of our Air Forces as a whole. We have in the Memorandum the information that there
is to be an addition of three regular squadrons this year. That will bring us up to 42 squadrons for home defence, which is a long way behind, as my right hon. Friend has said, the 52 squadrons that were promised in 1923. When I look abroad and survey the increases that have taken place in foreign Air Forces, I can see no reason for considering that our requirements for air defence to-day are in any way less than was foreseen seven years ago. It is by no means reassuring to see it laid down in the White Paper that this year we again hold fifth place among the Air Forces of the world. I am one of those who think that Air Power is every bit as important to the people of these islands as sea power. What an outcry there would be, if our sea power were to drop to fifth place! I fail to see how the general reduction in air armaments which is contemplated in the Memorandum will reduce the disparity which the Government regard as so serious. If the Government think that foreign Air Powers are going to reduce their Air Forces without a corresponding reduction in our Air Force, I am afraid that they will be disappointed. It is neither fair to our Air Force nor wise in our own interests to rely upon superior efficiency, to make up for numerical inferiority. For one thing, we can never reach finality in the performance of machines. It is only to-day, as the Under-Secretary of State has told us, that we see disappearing the last types of the war time machines. Twelve squadrons are being re-armed with newer types. This step is long overdue. The time we have had to wait for it illustrates how precarious a thing it is to rely for safety upon retaining a lead in types of machines, to the neglect of the maintenance of adequate numbers.
Our comparatively small Air Force has duties to perform in all parts of a worldwide Empire. The mobility of air power has been well illustrated in the Memorandum, in the reference to the eight machines of No. 36 Squadron operating at Singapore. The example illustrates how widely distributed are the interests we have to protect and how valuable is the flying boat for the purpose. In that connection, I am delighted to see that progress is being made with the sea-plane testing tank. That, and the large wind tunnel, to which the Under-Secre-
tary of State referred, are two items of equipment which are urgently needed, and, I think, that they will pay for themselves many times over. We have had another example of co-operation between air forces and land forces in last year's operations on the Indian frontier. There we were confronted with something new in the history of frontier operations. For the first time the frontier was disturbed from one end to the other, chiefly by the propaganda of agitators operating in India itself. The trouble was so widespread that ground forces alone could scarcely have dealt with it. Action had to be swift to prevent a blaze which would have run from one end of the frontier to the other, and the Air Force were able to provide the all necessary speed, whereby the trouble was kept within limits and could be adequately dealt with by the ground forces. The mobility of the Air Force can do much, and will do a great deal more. Garrisons need no longer be locked up in small frontier stations or in forts. Smaller ground forces, co-operating with Air Forces, at a great saving of time, of lives, and of money, can do work which a few years ago would have taken very much larger forces many months to perform at very great cost. If these widespread interests of ours are to be adequately protected, and if full advantage is to be taken of Air Power, we must have an Air Force numerically adequate to the enormous demands which the very nature of our Empire makes upon it.
I will turn for a few moments to civil aviation. The Under-Secretary of State has given us some information about the Australian service. I had hoped that he might have told us that it had progressed more than it, apparently, has done. If it is true that the financial situation in Australia is holding up matters at that end, would it not be possible to carry the line forward at least as far as Singapore? I ask the Under-Secretary of State, how long is it proposed that the complete service shall take for the journey from London to Port Darwin? Can he give us any idea of the charges which will have to be made, and how great a proportion of the subsidies paid will fall upon Great Britain? Is the Indian section going to be flown by an Indian organisation or by the Indian
Government? I cannot remember exactly what the hon. Gentleman said. The question has been under consideration for the past five years, and, surely, it is time that some decision was come to on the matter. I hope that the Government are going to press very strongly the advantages of unified control. It is very satisfactory to see figuring for the first time in these Estimates an item for contributions from Dominion and Colonial Governments. In this particular case it is for the Imperial Air Service to Soutn Africa. It is a very healthy sign because it shows that at last the Empire is pulling together for the formation of Empire air routes, and it, is a principle which I feel sure the hon. Gentleman will agree deserves all possible encouragement.
With regard to the Air line to India, I am sure that the House must have been very glad to hear that the difficulties with Greece and Italy have been smoothed out apparently for one year. These difficulties have to be faced, and the Under-Secretary of State did not say anything about the link over Persian territory and down the Persian Gulf. I believe that the present arrangement we have with Persia is supposed to last for another year. What arrangements have been made for continuing and making permanent that arrangement? That section of the line, however well and smoothly the service may run until then, as far as the England-Indian service is concerned, is an important one. Perhaps the Under-Secretary of State will be able to tell us later on what is going on with regard to that very important question.
The long-distance flights which have been carried out by Air Force machines have, obviously, done very excellent pioneer work for our Empire air routes. They have shown, and are showing, what are the real difficulties in the way of necessary ground organisation and the acquisition of meteorological information, and how those difficulties can be overcome. These routine service flights, aiming as they do at regularity rather than records, do far more good to civil aviation than the non-stop stunt flights, which, after all, add little to the sum of aeronautical knowledge, helping, as they do, towards regularity of civil air lines. But the regularity for which we look will not be achieved unless we can
make quite certain that the whole organisation is not liable, at any moment, to be put out of gear by international misunderstandings with the countries over which they have to fly.
7.0 p.m.
Coming nearer home, I should like to say a few words about the surface of Croydon aerodrome. I am very glad to see that the Government are fully aware of the fact that something ought to be done towards improving it. I feel that there is a great deal more that could be done to it without entailing any great expense. After all, Croydon is the principal air port not only of this island but of our Empire, and it ought to be made worthy of the role it fills, and not be left as it is now, with a great hole in the middle of it. The hon. and gallant Member for Hert-ford (Rear-Admiral Sueter) has mentioned the Schneider Trophy, and I should like to associate myself in congratulating the Government upon having allowed themselves to be moved from their first decision. I think everybody will agree it would have been a thousand pities if we had let the contest go by default. While we congratulate the Government on their final decision, I think we must also congratulate ourselves that the prompt and patriotic action and superb generosity of Lady Houston has made it possible for the Government to come to that final decision without swerving a hair's breadth from the strict path of national economy. I am certain Members of all parties will agree that we must now concentrate on one thing and one thing only, and that is on wining the Trophy this year.
There are one or two small points of administration about which I should like to ask. Incidentally, I welcome the reference in the White Paper to the improved opportunities that are made available for airmen to rise to officer ranks. Obviously the better the career which is open to airmen, the better stamp of airman we shall get. Can the Under-Secretary give us any information about the progress which is being made in the building of a new cadet college at Cranwell? The cadets are still living in War-time hutments and, from what I can gather, very little progress has been made since last year in the building of this college. I do not know whether the Minister can give us any definite date
when the college will be completed, but I should like to urge upon him the very great necessity for pushing on with this work as fast as he possibly can.
I notice that there is a substantial increase in the Estimates for the cost of petrol and oil. Assuming that we can exercise proper control, which I suppose we can, the increase is significant as showing the efficiency of the more powerful engines we now use in our aeroplanes and as being a sign of a very satisfactory increase in the number of hours flown. There can be no two opinions about the importance of frequent and regular flights. A steady increase in the number of miles flown is one of the most reliable signs of the maintenance of efficiency. It is probably true that the increase in the number of miles flown in the year does give greater opportunity for accidents but that is unavoidable and, as Lord Trenchard pointed out in a letter to the "Times" the other day, accidents have a curious way of coming in batches. He also pointed out that if you take an average period and calculate the number of hours flown and the number of accidents, you will find that the percentage of accidents to the number of miles flown is decreasing every year in the Royal Air Force.
I hope that I have not overlooked information which is already included in the Estimates, but I should like to ask the Under-Secretary for a little information about light aeroplane clubs. Can he tell us the number of clubs now in existence both in Great Britain and the Empire, how many members they comprise, how the membership compares with last year and how many licences have been issued both to members of light aeroplane clubs and other clubs? I, myself, lay far greater store on "A" licences than "B" licences, because it is "A" licences that make the country air-minded. This light aeroplane movement is a distinctly British movement and one which we should he proud of and encourage as much as we can. I believe I am right in saying that we have in this country far more private flyers in comparison with the population than any other country in the world. I doubt if anything contributes more to making the nation air-minded than the light aeroplane club movement. As to gliding,
about which I confess I know very little, it seems to me admirably fitted to work in with the light aeroplane movement. It is extremely cheap and makes people who could not possibly afford an aeroplane keen on flying, and provides excellent preliminary training for power flights. I do not know if the Under-Secretary can tell us if the Government have any intention at any time to give any backing or encouragement to gliding? Perhaps he will be able to answer some of the questions which have been put to him in the course of the Debate when he replies.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I should like to begin by dealing with the point raised in the first place by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea (Sir S. Hoare) in reference to the statement. made in the column of a daily newspaper this morning concerning the probable or possible contents of the Simon Report. That point is quite new, and I was not aware of it, as a matter that would be raised in the Debates. It is, of course, rather difficult to say much on the subject, except this. Whatever there may be in the statement made in that paper, I do not know and I can say nothing at all as to its accuracy or otherwise. What I can say quite definitely upon the subject is that the Air Ministry has not yet received a copy of the Simon Report or even an advance copy. That is really all I know about the subject, and all I can tell the right hon. Baronet at the moment. That statement I make quite definitely, and what there is beyond that to be said on the matter I do not know.

Sir S. HOARE: Surely the hon. Gentleman can give an undertaking that an inquiry will be made by the Cabinet into the way in which the paper got hold of the information, for it is quite obvious that the paper had the report in its hands.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I do not think it is reasonable that the right hon. Baronet should ask me to give him such an assurance without more notice on a matter of this kind. I can only say that the Air Ministry has not received a copy of the report or an advance copy and that the leakage therefore, if it is a leakage—and that is a matter of presump-
tion, of course—could not have been a leakage from the Air Ministry itself.

Sir S. HOARE: It seems to me amazing that where there is an obvious leakage of an Air Ministry document, the hon. Gentleman should not at once give an undertaking that there will be an inquiry, but as, much to my surprise, I cannot get an answer on the point, I shall put a question to the Prime Minister on the subject on Thursday.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I think that the only statement the right hon. Baronet can reasonably ask me to make is that I shall personally look into the matter myself and see what there is in it. It is rather unreasonable for him to ask me to make a decision of this kind without consultation. I have said all that I can say on the subject, and I am exceedingly sorry that there should be an appearance, at any rate, of a leakage of information on that important matter.
The right hon. Baronet the Member for Chelsea, the hon. Member for Devonport (Mr. Hore-Belisha) and other hon. Members have touched on the question of policy. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Hythe (Sir P. Sassoon) referred to the question of the Air strength of this country as compared with that of foreign nations. I do not want to go into the large question of policy or to discuss it now, especially in view of the fact that I have announced to the House that an important increase in the Home Defence Force will be made this year and that we hope, of course, the question of Air power and Disarmament will be satisfactorily dealt with and settled at the Disarmament Conference. I should like to say that the policy of which the Home Defence increase is part is a policy that has been continuous over a number of years, and goes back to 1923. It was based not upon the question of a comparison with the Air Power of foreign countries but rather upon the general political and peace situation of the world. The policy of retardation, which was accepted and carried out by the past Government as well as this, was a policy based on the assumption that it was unreasonable to expect a major war within the course of a considerable number of
years. That attitude, after all, is the only one which is really possible with regard to the development of the Home Defence Force or the Air Force as a whole.
It has been pointed out by the hon. Member for Devonport that the idea of an international race in armaments is quite foreign to anything which would be accepted by this House or by the country. Really, the question of efficiency is very important, and the question of defence is also very important, and it is quite impossible to contemplate the beginning of a contest for air supremacy on the part of this country as against other countries or combinations of countries. It would be beginning a race of armaments, and it certainly would not be merely a question of speeding up and increasing our own forces in order to reach the level of the other forces or combinations of forces. It would be definitely a race of armaments. It appears to me that really we have to consider this question not from the point of view so much of what the other nations are doing, and comparative first-line strengths, as from the point of view of the international position politically. It is because the international position is better than it was, and because it is a position which is bringing hope to the minds and hearts of the people of this country and, I hope, of the world, that we are justified in carrying on the policy of the past Government and going slower than was originally contemplated when the Home Defence scheme was inaugurated. I put these points of view forward, because I am sure that we should be going entirely on wrong lines if we thought that comparative strength is the one or the only consideration that we have to bear in mind in regard to the efficiency of the Air Force. It is true that the British Air Force has worldwide responsibilities, and it is true that we must look to defence, and it is purely on the question, or mainly on the question, of defence that I have had to say what I have said this evening in regard to the increase in the Air Force. It is an increase in the Home Defence Force coupled with the highest possible standard of efficiency that we are justified in making and defending, resting our full and final hope upon a better
political situation in the world, and the results of the Disarmament Conference.
I should like to join in the congratulations to the Noble Lord the Member for East Renfrew (Marquess of Clydesdale) on his maiden speech. Apart from its efficiency as a speech, it indicated pretty clearly that he has a very great interest in aviation as well as an interest in his native country. He asks us not to forget Scotland. I do not think that it is an easy thing to forget Scotland at any time. As a matter of fact, the Scottish Flying Club is one of the most vigorous and one of the most efficient clubs in the whole kingdom. We are anxious to extend flying clubs and a knowledge of aviation generally throughout the whole of Great Britain, and certainly we do not desire to neglect any section of it.
With regard to the question of municipal aerodromes, which was raised by the hon. Member for Kennington (Mr. Matters), I should like to give him and the Committee information as to the position at the present time beyond the particulars that he introduced into his speech. During the year the Air Ministry has issued circular letters calling the attention of municipalities to the danger to aircraft from overhead electric cables near aerodromes, and to the necessity of carrying out complete surveys before deciding upon a particular site for an aerodrome, even if such sites may have been approved by the Air Ministry, in order that the best available sites may be obtained. I would like to stress the fact that the Air Ministry is working in close liaison with the Electricity Commissioners, and I would like to impress upon municipalities all over the country the importance of having a vast network of aerodromes and, if we are to have a quick and valuable development in Air Services, to look further ahead than many of them are doing.
It may not be possible for the local authorities in various places to lay down aerodromes, because considerations of many kinds, including finance, may prevent that at the moment. Moreover, it may not be considered just the time to do it, having regard to the stage of development of aviation in this country, but, if municipalities will go so far as to get the best advice from the Air Ministry
that the Ministry can give, advice which will be given without any question, and earmark areas of land suitable, and the best kind of land, for the future development of aerodromes, say, within the next five or ten years, it will help considerably. The question of electric cables is an indication of the help that can be given. If we can in conjunction with the Electricity Commissioners get some idea of the necessities of civil aviation throughout the country a great many difficulties may be smoothed over and a great many future difficulties may be prevented.
The hon. Member for Devonport spoke on the subject of air defence policy. I do not want to follow him on those lines. To some extent, I agree with what he said, but the policy of the Ministry is a continuous policy, based upon the real needs of the Service, with the larger view of the development of world peace. The hon. Member also spoke on the subject of the control of civil aviation and suggested that it should come under the Board of Trade. That, of course, is a matter of opinion on the part of the hon. Member. Other hon. Members may have other opinions upon that subject. The hon. Member knows that there are many reasons that could be put forward against such a policy as that which he proposes. The matter has been thoroughly investigated, and the general conclusion is that, at any rate at the present stage of civil aviation, having regard to research and development from the scientific point of view, the Air Force and civil aviation are so entwined that a proposal for making civil aviation part of the activities of the Board of Trade and taking it entirely away from the Air Ministry is hardly a practical proposition. That indicates the question that was also raised with regard to the amalgamation of common services. There was a committee in 1922, of which Sir Alfred Mond was the first chairman, and later Lord Weir, which exposed the fallacy of the idea that substantial economy could be effected by the simple amalgamation of the common services of the three fighting departments.
The hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Thanet (Captain Balfour) raised the question of flying training schools, and indicated his view that those schools were overworked. He suggested ways in which there might be substituted other
forms of work in order to give the men physical relaxation. The standard of work expected of Air Force units is rightly high, but no abnormal strain is placed upon the units in question. Apart from unavoidable fluctuations caused by weather, the work of the flying training schools follows a regular syllabus, and no instruction is given on Saturday afternoons or on Sundays. Special care is taken to see that flying instructors are not employed for too long a period on that somewhat exacting duty.

Captain BALFOUR: Will the hon. Member deny that at the flying training school at Grantham, at the Digby Aerodrome, instructors have flown constantly on Saturday and Sunday afternoons? If he desires, I can give the actual dates on which they have flown for many weeks.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I shall be glad to have any information that the hon. and gallant Member can supply to me. I have been at the Digby Aerodrome and have seen the plan of work there. Whatever flying takes place on Saturday or Sunday, it does not indicate overwork. I will, however, look into the question. The normal period as a flying instructor is three years. The abolition of the No. 1 flying training school, which has been referred to, will not increase the strain on other flying training schools, as it has been made possible by successive economies in the use of officer personnel and, therefore, in the number of entrants requiring flying training.
The work of Army co-operation is certainly strenuous during the collective training season, the summer months, but not more so than is advantageous in the interests of the Service. It involves the movement of squadrons to other stations to take part in exercises and manoeuvres in co-operation with Army units, but the mobility of the Air Force is one of its most characteristic features, and officers and airmen recognise such movement as a natural and normal part of a life in the Service. During the winter months a squadron remains at its normal station and is fully occupied carrying out the programme of duties allocated to the individual training season. During these months each member of the squadron is brought up to the standard necessary to
raise the squadron to its full efficiency in the coming collective training season.
The hon. and gallant Member for Hertford (Rear-Admiral Sueter) raised a number of questions. He referred to the Anglo-Italian Convention, some particulars of which I gave to the Committee, and asked a question in regard to Malta. The Anglo-Italian Convention includes permission for operation to Malta. There are reciprocal arrangements with the Italian Government. Nothing beyond the permission has been asked for, because it is not a practical development at the present time so far as Malta is concerned. The statement that was made by the hon. Member with regard to expense, was true. It will be remembered that that matter was discussed fairly fully last year, and the expense of the breakwater was an impossible amount to consider so far as the Central Government was concerned. I hope that in time Malta will develop as a very important station in the Mediterranean. It certainly is geographically important, and in view of the development of aviation generally and such developments as I have indicated, one can hope that in the near future there will be very important developments in that direction.

Rear-Admiral SUETER: If the Italians are going to use Malta as a flying station, perhaps we might have some money from Signor Mussolini to develop Malta.

Mr. MONTAGUE: In regard to the question of Australia, I was asked if I could give information how long it would take for the air mail service to get to Port Darwin. The time is approximately 11 days. I was also asked a question about light aeroplane clubs. During last year there was an increase over the previous year of 61 per cent. in the number of Class A pilot licences held, the total figure being 1,708. The bon. and gallant Member also asked about Cranwell College. It was designed by the Office of Works, who are superintending the construction. Work on the site commenced during 1929, when a contract was entered into for excavation, foundations and drainage, and for carrying the walls up to the ground floor level. A further contract for structure was entered into in December, 1930, and work has commenced upon that. A sum of £90,000 is allowed in the Estimates to be
expended on payment of contracts and certain incidental work in connection with the water supply not included in the main contract. It is anticipated that the college will be ready for occupation during 1933.
I think it is well that I should repeat the announcement of the Secretary of State with regard to the question of the publication of reports of accidents:
In future the conclusions will be published in cases of all accidents in this country to British civil aircraft plying for hire which involve loss of life or serious injury. Accordingly, the conclusions will be published, not only in the cases of accidents on regular air transport services, which is the class of accident round which discussions have so far centred, but also in the cases of all accidents to 'taxi' or 'joy riding' machines, whenever they are plying for hire or reward in the normal course of civil aviation. The inspector's conclusions will also be published in all cases, other than those failing in the category mentioned, which presents special features, or in which it appears that there were any useful lessons to be learned from the point of view of practical flying, technical development or aircraft construction. Interested parties as hitherto, can always have the gist of conclusions communicated to them. Where an investigation has been held by a Court of inquiry, or an investigation has been made by such a body as the Aero- nautical Research Committee, the present practice of publishing these reports will be continued.
With regard to accidents in the Royal Air Force, I must point out that the number of fatalities is not altogether a criterion. A more correct criterion is the ratio which the accidents bear to the amount of flying or the size of the Air Force. With the increase in the Air Force in the last 10 years there has been no corresponding increase in the number of accidents., and during the 10 years there has been a considerable increase in the size of the Air Force. The present year has seen nine fatal accidents in the first 10 weeks, but even that rate taken with the larger amount of flying gives 47 accidents for the year, which is the same as in 1930 although more than in 1929. The hours flown per fatal accident shows an increase of ever one-third over previous years except 1929. Taking 1929 and 1930 together the hours flown per accident are nearly three times those for 1923–1924, and four times those for 1921–1922, and within that period of 10 years the speeds of aircraft have been increased by nearly 50 per cent., and the kind of work that
has to be done to-day is of a much more advanced description than it was a few years ago. Formation manoeuvres, inverted flying, rolling, and so on, were attempted only by a few individuals 10 years ago.
Although there is a much higher standard, the accident rate has actually decreased. Everything is done to minimise accidents. I mentioned in my first speech this evening that I have personally paid some attention to the question of safety, and as one who is not a pilot I say that in my view there can be no ground for any serious criticism on the score of what is being done to prevent accidents. Unfortunately, the majority of accidents are due to errors of judgment on the part of pilots, and I do not see that these can be avoided altogether because it is impossible to produce an efficient fighting force entirely on the principle of safety first. I think these figures will be of interest to the House upon a very important subject which has occupied public attention to some considerable degree recently. A number of other matters have been referred to during the Debate but I have already taken up more time than I should have done. If there is anything I can do to give hon. Members further information I shall be pleased to do it on Report stage, or in any other way, as I want the House to have the fullest information I can give.

CIVIL AVIATION.

Captain CAZALET: I beg to move, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof the words:
this House is strongly of opinion that every possible encouragement should be given to all organisations concerned with the development of every system of Imperial Air transport, and that adequate provision should be made for the progress of civil aviation throughout the Empire.
I appreciate the fact that there are many hon. Members far better qualified than I am by technical knowledge and experience to move this Amendment, but the luck of the Ballot has given me the privilege of raising the question of civil aviation and to urge the Government to do all in their power to assist and develop it. I am glad it has been my good fortune to raise this matter because it is a subject which is of national interest, upon which hon. Members desire
to elicit information from the Government and also to offer some genuine constructive proposals. I am not one of those who enjoy a flight in an aeroplane, in fact, I never come down from a trip without making a solemn vow that I will never leave mother earth again until I go to a far more permanent abode than any to which the Air Force can take me. I realise that aviation as a means of transport for mails and passengers, and for certain kinds of merchandise, has come to stay. I think I can also show by figures that it is a very rapidly developing aspect of our national life and one which already plays a not unimportant part in our industrial welfare. The number of miles flown last year by civil aviation was 136,000, and 618,000 passengers were carried, together with 13,000 tons of merchandise. Over 1,800 aeroplanes were used and 3,000 aerodromes are prepared and equipped to receive them.
These figures show what an important part in our national and industrial life civil aviation plays to-day. We are apt to decry the efficiency of our own services. I thought that in the matter of civil aviation we were behindhand and extravagant, but I must frankly confess that after making a study of this question I have nothing but admiration for the work that is being done in civil aviation in this country. At the same time civil aviation will never be a commercial proposition in this country. It may be that individuals will continue to use aeroplanes for business and pleasure purposes to an increasing degree, but as a commercial proposition I think we are already too well served by our railways. Sir Eric Geddes, in flying to Birmingham, was not able to save any time by going in an aeroplane rather than by the two-hour train service from Paddington. In the same way, if we take Edinburgh, unless there is a far more highly developed night flying service it will be more convenient to get into the train at midnight and arrive at Edinburgh early next morning than to occupy a certain portion of the day in flying to Edinburgh.
There are certain principles which should govern civil aviation, safety, regularity and economy, and I heartily subscribe to all three. My adhering strictly to these principles we may occa-
sionally find ourselves temporarily eclipsed by some other country, yet in the long run we shall be the gainers. If civil aviation is to be made a commercial proposition, you must have the entire confidence of the public. The confidence of a few experts has been secured already, but speaking as a purely ordinary member of the public, I prefer that civil aviation should be carried on with 80 to 90 per cent, of regularity and safety rather than that it should make any spectacular flights. It does not worry me in the least to learn that one country has flown more miles or greater distances than we have. The question that arises is, why is it necessary to give this subsidy? It is not given in the case of railways or shipping. How much longer will it be necessary to give this very substantial subsidy to civil aviation? There is only one air service as far as I know which is run on a commercial basis, and that is in the State of Columbia, whose capital is 600 miles from the sea. They charge three times the amount of the train service fares for flying from the port to the capital, and they have succeeded now for some years in running a highly profitable commercial line. With that exception there is no civil aviation service which is run at a profit.
The obvious reason is that aviation has come upon a world which is well organised already as regards transport. Railways developed slowly as they were shown to be a commercial proposition, but we in this country, nor any other large nation, can possibly refuse a subsidy to civil aviation if by such refusal we are deprived of any civil aviation whatsoever. Of course you can increase speed. There was a great outcry some time ago by a prominent person because as they were flying by an Imperial Airways machine they were passed by a German machine. It is perfectly easy to increase your speed if you are prepared to pay more money, but I understand that if you increase your speed by 20 per cent. you also increase your cost by 50 per cent. It is purely a matter of pounds, shillings and pence, whether you are prepared to compete in speed with other foreign countries.
There is one aspect which should be borne in mind, and that is that civil aviation does not desire to compete with
railways or shipping. Its primary object is to be complementary to these means of transport. It is on the lines of a complementary service that the greatest benefit lies for civil aviation. There are various other things, such as the surveying of land, crop spraying and fire fighting, all of which are of more importance in the Dominions and other parts of the Empire than in this country. The two main subsidies with which I wish to deal are the subsidy, roughly of £3,000,000 spread over 10 years, for the Indian route, and that of £1,000,000 for the African route. It is highly satisfactory to learn that in the last 10 months on the Indian route there has been a 100 per cent. regularity of flights. I do not know whether that figure is up to date, but it was the figure given to me a few weeks ago. On the other hand, it is possible to offer certain criticisms in regard to the Indian flights. Here I must apologise, for I realise that it is impossible not to repeat some of the comments already made.
The average pace for the Indian route is only 28 miles an hour. Of course I recognise that unless you are going to introduce night flying it will be very difficult to increase that speed to any considerable extent. Again there is the criticism that the charges made for postal service are too high. I understand that there is a charge of 6d. per half ounce. Unless you can get the business community as a whole to regard the Indian mail not as something exceptional, but as the ordinary method for sending a greater part of correspondence, I do not think you will ever put the service on a paying footing. The London Chamber of Commerce feels strongly on the question of having a special rate for a quarter ounce packet, and that matter I believe the Under-Secretary has under consideration. Will he tell us his views on the subject?
There are one or two other questions I want to put. I am not clear what is the exact position in India to-day. Is it a separate organization? For instance, if the passenger is on his way beyond India is he allowed to proceed in the same machine? In the matter of merchandise have goods to be transhipped at Karachi into another plane belonging to a separate organisation in
India? I heard the Under-Secretary's statement, but I confess that I did not understand it fully. Various questions have been asked in the House, and each answer seems to have complicated the matter even further. Also I would like very much to know approximately when the Under-Secretary thinks that the full flight to Australia will be open. He has told us of some of the difficulties. If he can hold out some hope that within six months it will be a fait accompli that will reassure many people who are beginning to doubt whether this nil flight will ever be carried into effect. What are the Dutch doing in the matter? It would be rather deplorable and depressing if they forestalled us on this essentially Imperial route.
There are two observations I wish to make with regard to the African flight. My first word is as to the advisability of trying to do something for West Africa as well as East Africa. I understand that the East, African route from London to Cairo will be open on 1st June. At present they have reached Kenya. I understand that all the Governments are co-operating, both by friendly assistance generally and in regard to finance, to the complete satisfaction of the home Government. But in regard to West Africa so far nothing whatever has been done. I want to put in a very special plea regarding it, and to emphasise the aspect that I have already mentioned, namely, the Air Service being complementary to other services. Hon. Members are aware that the service of civil servants in West Africa is for 18 months. That is a long time to serve in a horrible climate. Special arrangements have been made in the last year by which civil servants and others can get exceptional terms to come home for a long leave. It is the journey that does them the good.
This opportunity is only effective to-day to Sierra Leone. South of that you have the Gold Coast and Nigeria, to which the service does not operate. Nigeria has 20,000,000 inhabitants among whore is a very considerable body of Englishmen. If it was possible to arrange some weekly service from Nigeria and the Gold Coast to Sierra Leone it would be possible for English civil servants in those two countries to come home for a period of
a few days during each term of service of 18 months. I have been pressed by many representatives in the Service to put this point before the Government. Those are countries in which it is impossible to keep your children. It makes a whole difference to a man's term of service for 18 months if he knows that once during that time he may come home and see his family, if for a few days only. I ask the Under-Secretary to give this suggestion his serious consideration.
I have been discussing with various authorities the African flight, and I do not think that the full difficulties of that flight are usually apprehended. To run a regular service is a very different thing from doing a solo flight. The one is adventurous and spectacular and dangerous, and the other has to be commercial, regular and safe. I know that the one is necessary to the other. We have had many brilliant examples, of which we are all proud, of the solo flight. There are so many different conditions to be considered in dealing with this question. For instance only by experience can you find out what are the varied conditions at different times of the year. South of the Sudan at one time of the year you can land in an ordinary aeroplane, but six months later the whole place is swamps and bogs and you have to change into a different kind of aeroplane altogether. You can unload supplies at various points along the route at one period and store them with safety, but during the other six months of the year, owing to the temperature, and the animals, big and small, that live in those countries, you want totally different conditions to protect those supplies.
It is not like the Indian route, along which you have not to cross very high mountains. On the African flight almost every kind of atmosphere has to be experienced. It is only practice and long experience that will show exactly what are the best types of machines to make the London to Cairo flight the success that it ought to be. I am mentioning these difficulties only because I think a great many people are impatient because more has not been done already. It would be useless to start a service which is to be of the greatest use to all those who live on the East Coast of Africa
unless it was started on sound, sane, common-sense, regular and safe lines.
One word more as to the amount of subsidy which is necessary. As I have said, if you want to get a more frequent service, to run twice a week instead of once, you want greater speed, and you can have it if you are prepared to pay for it. Other countries subsidise civil aviation from a variety of motives. France wishes to equip the greatest possible number of aeroplanes; Germany because she has not an air service of her own encourages civil aviation; America allows the Post Office to subsidise civil aviation to the tune of over 90 per cent. I believe that we strike a very happy medium. Here are some of the difficulties. The subsidy given by the United States of America is 8s. 1d. per mile flown, in Germany it is Ss. 8d., in France 15s. 8d. and in this country 5s. 7d. per mile flown. That shows that we run the service on a far more econmical basis than any other country. Then take the average number of miles flown by the individual airman. In the United States it is 32,000 miles, in Germany 31,000, in France only 18,000, and in this country 68,000. Here again the figures show that we get far better value out of the aeroplane with our subsidies than does any other nation. We are working along sound commercial lines.
As was pointed out by Sir Eric Geddes in an interesting speech at Cambridge a few weeks ago, there are half a dozen factors upon which we may hope to see considerable economies effected in the near future. It is no idle dream to hope that in a few years we shall be able to establish civil aviation on a commercial basis in this country. I am certain that the country that can first make civil aviation a commercial proposition will capture the trade of the whole world. We are working along those lines more rapidly than any other country. Let me ask one or two questions. First in regard to the Post Office charges for mails. It is contended that the Post Office is making a profit out of the charge of 6d. per half-ounce. Most of the letters do not weight half an ounce. The Post Office does not refund to the Air Ministry or the civil aviation authorities the profit that it makes. It is contended by some that the Post Office should not make a profit out of this service, which is already
largely subsidised by the taxpayer. Then there is the question. of the night postal service, which the London Chamber of Commerce, representing various other bodies, seems to think, and no doubt rightly, is a very important factor to be considered.
8.0 p.m.
Further, there is the question of the Transatlantic Air Service. It has been mooted—whether it is within the realm of practical polities I do not know—that by the Azores and Bermuda it would be possible to get a Transatlantic service which would be very advantageous commercially. A further question is, what steps are being taken in regard to an international conference or negotiations for air transport? There have been conferences in the past, and the results in many cases have been highly satisfactory, and I do not know whether the Under-Secretary of State contemplates any further conference to clear up a variety of points, of which no doubt he is already only too well aware.
In other realms of transport, in railways and in ships, we have always been pioneers, and I think we can still be proud of our position. We still run, I think, the most efficient railway service, and we certainly run actually the fastest train that runs in the world. In shipping, in our mercantile marine, we have no need to be ashamed of the position which we occupy in the world to-day. I am quite certain that in this new development of civil aviation, with those characteristics which I believe we hold in a greater degree than any other nation, courage, patience, and common sense, if we pursue a policy based on those principles, we shall be able to show the world that we are neither dead, dying, nor asleep, and that very shortly we shall be able, not only to compete, but to compete successfully, in this direction with any other nation in the world.

Mr. EVERARD: I beg to second the Amendment.
I do so with great pleasure, because I see that the hon. Member for Ilkeston (Mr. G. Oliver), on the benches opposite, moved a very similar Amendment to this that was received generally last year with approval on all sides of the House. The hon. Member for North Bristol (Mr. Ayles) is waiting to pounce on the Under-
Secretary of State to remove the whole of the Air Force except 2,000, but I think that even he will agree with us that money expended upon the improvement of the civil side of aviation is money of which he could himself support the expenditure. Therefore, I feel that we are on safe ground in moving this Amendment.
My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Chippenham (Captain Cazalet) has touched on the difficulties with which the Under-Secretary of State is faced. There is no doubt at all that very great and important extensions could take place in the matter of our Imperial flying resources if the money were available. We find that not only in this country is it difficult to be able to increase the amount of expenditure for civil aviation. We find even one of the greatest companies operating in France recently finding it difficult to get any money from the Government for the extension of its service. I noticed in the paper a day or two ago that the Compagnie Generale Aeropostale, which runs the longest air route in the world, that from France to Buenos Aires, is in a very difficult position and has asked the French Government for a subsidy of £640,000 a year for 14 years and has been unable to obtain the sanction of the French Government for that expenditure. That shows quite clearly that even in France, which is probably one of the most important air countries in the world, it is difficult to maintain the services which they have in operation at present.
I would like to make one or two observations on the progress of our Imperial air routes, and to consider what are the advantages and the disadvantages of having only one company to which we pay these subsidies. It is well known that the only company that receives these subsidies from the. Government in this country is Imperial Airways, Limited, and I do not wish to depreciate—in fact, I admire enormously—the work which they have done and are doing to-day, but at the same time I appreciate also that there may be times when, owing to the amount of work which they have in hand, there may be equally good companies which could undertake some of the smaller local services, which would implement and improve the air services, particularly near our own homes here. I
should also like to point out that whereas we hold on land, at sea, and in the air "records" for the fastest times, it cannot certainly be said that we hold the "record" for the fastest time for our ordinary Imperial liners. Their average rate of about 85 miles an hour can be nearly doubled to-day by some of the air liners turned out by other countries, and unless we take steps to increase the speed of these air liners I think we shall find the trade going to other companies which are able to provide faster machines.
I should like also to say that there is one thing about Imperial Airways, Limited, which deserves the very greatest credit, and which is no doubt why it is held in such esteem by the travelling public of this country. That is the degree of safety which they give to the travelling public. It is well known that as you increase the pace of aircraft you also increase the stalling speed, rendering it more dangerous for landing if forced landings have to be made, and from that point of view Imperial Airways, Limited, are far safer, in my opinion, than any other line which operates for civil purposes at the present time.
With regard to the new air route to the Cape, I understand that the 5,700 miles are to be divided into eight stages, that from Cairo to the Cape will take eight days and eight nights, and that the passengers will spend the nights at eight allotted resting places on the way. That is all right from the point of view of the travelling public. The Under-Secretary of State has spoken to-day on the question of noise in aircraft, and last year he stressed the same point. I do not think anybody here will consider that eight hours' flying in one of those big cabin liners is not as much as anybody wants to do for eight or nine days on end. That may be all right from the point of view of the travelling public, but are the travelling public going to be of more importance and larger in numbers than the amount of mails which these machines could carry? If it can be shown to the public that the mail contracts are more important than the passenger carrying, I think we should not fly on this route for only eight hours a day, but certainly for the best part of the 24 hours, which could easily be done
under a properly organised system of night flying and linking up from point to point.
I am glad to know that an arrangement has been made with the Italian Government, because that, of course, again will reduce the time which it will take to get to Cape Town from 12 days, which is the estimate at present—that is, four days to Cairo and eight days from Cairo onward—to 10½ days, as the Under-Secretary has told us. By night flying that could easily be reduced to seven days, and I suggest that if we could send mails to Cape Town in seven days, the air mail services would be very much more largely used by the business community of this country than they are being used at present. I want to ask the Under-Secretary of State whether proper experiments have been made as regards the wireless conditions out on this new route. I am always led to understand that a great part of the disturbance which we hear in this country on our wireless sets is caused by the sand in the Sahara, and if that be so—and I believe it is right—surely if aircraft are operating so near to the Sahara as that route will be, it will be almost impossible to use wireless for the purpose of communicating with their various destinations for direction; and I would like to know whether experiments have been made to show that wireless can be used successfuly in that region for the direction of aircraft, or, if not, what particular methods will be used for direction finding purposes. As regards the extension of the route to Australia, I see that in the Memorandum which is published with the Air Estimates it says:
His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom attach great importance to the extension of the existing Indian service to Australia, and are ready to contribute to its cost. Modified proposals for the organisation of a mail service in the first instance have been communicated to His Majesty's Government in the Commonwealth of Australia an Bother interested administrations.
I should like to ask the Under-Secretary of State exactly where we stand in this matter. Is he still carrying on negotiations with His Majesty's Government in Australia, and what is the suggestion as to the amount and proportion of the cost which would be borne by this Government and by His Majesty's Government in
Australia? Personally, I am very glad to hear this afternoon that he is taking steps to put an experimental air mail service into being to see how it will work and whether it can be carried on satisfactorily in the future.
With regard to the service to the West Indies, I should like to ask what is the position of Atlantic Airways, Limited, who were given, I understand, power to run services in the West Indies. I believe that the power given to them lasted for only a year, and I should like to ask whether that has been extended, if a further licence has been granted to them, and, if so, on what particular terms?
I should also like to bring to the hon. Gentleman's notice some matters which are nearer home. I do not see why we should not be able to speed up our transatlantic mails by running a service from Galway across the centre of England to Hull. It seems to me that if the mails could be met at Galway, or even better if the planes could fly from the ships, as has been done from the "Ile de France" and other liners, we could save a considerable time in the mails crossing over the Atlantic. I should like to ask whether there is any consideration being given to the question of running a service from Galways say, to Birmingham and then across to Hull for these mails.
Then I should like again to bring to the hon. Gentleman's notice, as I did last year, the fact that there is no communication at all by air with the Channel Islands. Imperial Airways, Limited, used to run a service with the "Calcutta" flying boat, but that was taken off and put on the India route, and to-day there is no air service in operation at all. When you come to consider that if you want to leave London for Jersey by train and ship, it takes you 12 hours, and if you wish to fly from London to Jersey, it takes you 2½ hours, it seem to me that, from the point of view of mails, of newspapers, and of the travelling public, that indeed is a service more than any other on which aircraft should be made available.
On the question of the air mails, something must be done to make the carrying of air mails more popular. I believe that of all the mails which go to India, only 5 per cent. are sent by air. I do not
think that the Post Office authorities in this country have been very helpful in this matter. I understand that the Air Ministry and the London Chamber of Commerce and others have been pressing for some alteration in the postal services by air, but up to now little has been done. The suggestion has been made that the issue by this country of a definite air mail stamp would popularise the carrying of air mails. This is the only country of which I know which does any considerable amount of flying, and yet has not a proper air mail stamp, and, no doubt, the issue of such a stamp would do much to popularise the air mail with the general public and also advertise the various air services from this country to the Dominions. We are only carrying 6 per cent. of the whole of the world freight carried by air, whereas we are carrying 60 per cent. of the whole of the world freight carried by sea, and if we do not make efforts to popularise these air services among the general public of our country, we shall seriously fall behind in this important matter.
I should also like to know what is being done to improve the instruments in use on long air routes. If night flying is to be put into operation, as I understand it will be very shortly, I should like to know whether the Ministry have considered new types of beacons, and what types of lighting will be available for aerodromes on the long routes. It seems to me that in traversing a desert country, it will be necessary to have a long chain of beacons, if night flying is to be done safely. I believe that the United States are a long way ahead of us in the use which they make of beacons and various methods of lighting aircraft for landing purposes, and aerodrome lighting, and matters of that sort. Although we have in this country firms who are capable of making all these appliances just as well as any others, we have been very backward in this matter up to the present.
I very much appreciate what the Minister has been able to do in giving further assistance to flying clubs. They constitute an important part of our general civil aviation activities, and they have trained a great many pilots, both for the Royal Air Force and for other types of flying. In fact, most of the pilots who have carried out pioneer work in various
parts of the Empire, by showing the amount of time occupied in reaching outlying parts of our Dominions, by making surveys and other work of that sort, have been trained by these clubs. It is a great pleasure to find in a time of financial stringency that this subsidy, which is not large but is of considerable help to the clubs, has been allowed to remain in the Estimates this year. I hope and believe that in the future, when times are better, we may be able to expend more money on the civil side of aviation.
I firmly believe that nothing can do more to cement the British Empire than air services between its various parts. We deplore the fact that the construction of airships, which was an integral part of our inter-Imperial air system, has been attended with such disaster, but it remains all the more necessary to focus attention on heavier than air craft in order to link up the various outlying parts of the Empire—the purpose for which the airships were to be constructed. I hope that the Minister will do what he can to meet the views which we have expressed, and, on our part, I think we can assure him of our support particularly in what he is doing for civil aviation.

Mr. AYLES: With regard to the first part of the remarks of the hon. Member for Melton (Mr. Everard), I shall say nothing at the moment because that subject will be dealt with later by some of my colleagues, but I should like to refer to the second part of his speech in regard to civil aviation. I very heartily support the Amendment moved by the hon. and gallant Member for Chippenham (Captain Cazalet), because I am one of the representatives of a city which has been foremost in pioneer work in regard to aeronautical science. The spacious and up-to-date air port at Bristol is evidence of the great initiative and activity shown by Bristol men in reference to this important aspect of our future industrial and commercial life. It is not merely because it is a commercial development that civil aviation has the hearty support of my hon. Friends and myself. Those of us who are students of our Empire are not desirous that the Empire should break up, but rather that it should become stronger and develop and fulfil
its destiny in the highest and noblest sense. No one can consider the component parts of the Empire without realising the inconsequent development which seems to have characterised its growth—in some parts we find the highest type of civilisation and in other parts we find backward peoples. Civil aviation and the development of Imperial air routes will enable us to develop much faster the various parts of the Empire and bring them up to a higher level.
Those of us who have considered our African possessions for instance, must realise that it will be a good many decades before we have the economic resources required to bring together the parts of our African Empire and link them up to the Mother country in an intimate way. I suppose that future Imperial Conferences will treat more and more realistically the differences which exist at present between ourselves and the outposts of the Empire. We want those difficulties to he surmounted as rapidly as possible and it is only by association, by intimate contact, by rapid communication that we can get over those difficulties which have brought disaster to Empires in the past. It was exceedingly difficult 100 years ago to get from here to Constantinople, but to-day it is only a matter of a few hours. It is not long since a journey from here to the Antipodes was a matter of weeks, but now it is only a matter of days. As we can annihilate distance and get nearer together, the more we shall get to understand one another's difficulties, and the more we understand one another's difficulties the more we shall cement our Empire and accomplish our destiny in a way that is worthy of the work of our forebears. Because of that, and because civil aviation is probably the only civilised form of transport to those who travel to other countries; because I believe that it will link up the component parts of the Empire and the rest of the world in a way that will make for world peace, I heartily support the Amendment that has been moved by the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite.

Lieut.-Colonel GAULT: I support the Amendment so ably presented to the House by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Chippenham (Captain Cazalet), and I should like to preface
my remarks, seeing that I seldom find myself in agreement with hon. Gentlemen opposite, by complimenting the Under-Secretary of State upon the presentation of the Estimates. In view of the need for national economy, I also congratulate him upon having effected some real economies, which may be described as minor financial prunings without impairing in any way the services for which he is responsible. In fact, from a perusal of the White Paper, I take it that efficiency has been actually increased. I also congratulate the hon. Gentleman upon the admirable record in long-distance flying which was carried out by the Royal Air Force during the last 12 months—a record which embraced some 115,000 miles without injury to personnel or any serious damage to the machines involved. That is indeed a record of which the Royal Air Force and the nation can justly be proud.
It is rightly said that necessity is the mother of invention. It was probably the necessity of finding wider markets in the world that took our forebears on to the high seas many centuries ago. Necessity, coupled with the spirit of adventure and that search for trade, led up to the navigation laws of the 16th century, which are perhaps the foundation of our maritime supremacy of the last few centuries. As in the sixteenth century the need was for us to go upon the seas, so to-day there is a very real need for us to take to the air. We should, therefore, do well to follow an advanced policy, and introduce the necessary legislation for the betterment and improvement of our air services, particularly of the civil air lines, which are so necessary in order to link up the great Imperial heritage which is ours. If we are to be successful in becoming an air-minded race, it is very necessary for our people to be afforded means of getting off and getting on to the ground. That means aerodromes. It is true that we have 129 civil aerodromes, and 50 Royal Air Force aerodromes in the United Kingdom, but these have to a large extent sprung up without any comprehensive scheme, with the result that there are some districts with a large proportion of aerodromes and other districts with none at all. The Minister will be wise to do everything in his power to encourage local authorities to establish aerodromes on a
comprehensive scheme so that the flying services of the country, the local services, and amateur flyers may be able to travel where they will throughout the 'United Kingdom.
This brings me to the question of surfaces. Too much attention cannot be paid to this detail. Comparisons are frequently odious, but I think that the general opinion will be that the services of our aerdromes in England do riot compare favourably with the surfaces of aerodromes in Germany. The Germans have realised that by creating and establishing aerodromes with good, or perfect services, they have reduced the wear and tear on their machines, and that money spent on establishing good aerodrome surfaces is money well spent. Aerodromes at Tempelhof, Hamburg and Cologne can almost be described as lawns; they may perhaps he too perfect. I was glad to see in the White Paper that the Ministry intended to improve our aerodrome at Croydon, and to improve the surfaces there. The question of control of ground discipline should receive some attention. I have been much struck by the ground discipline in Germany, and although we may not have reached the stage where air traffic has developed to such an extent that there is a great deal of congestion at aerodromes, I am inclined to think that the discipline and control of German aerodromes can be taken as a model for us to copy. Too frequently we see machines going on to our aerodromes without any definite scheme of starting them off, and with the gradual growth and development of aviation that may be a factor of danger in air navigation. I would also like to see the Air Ministry arrange the necessary communication from aerodromes by telegraphs. I was surprised when I last landed at Lympne a few months ago to find that it was impossible to communicate by telegram from the aerodrome. That question should be looked into in the early future.
I was gratified to learn from the Under-Secretary that in future the reports of inquiries into accidents will be made public. It is most necessary to create confidence in the minds of our people. If the public are told the cause of accidents they will not be so diffident about air travel as they are if that knowledge has been withheld from them. Light aeroplane clubs are particularly
to be commended, for they frequently have to carry on under difficult circumstances and in conditions calling for a considerable amount of sacrifice. It is interesting to note how many people display their interest in flying by becoming members of these local clubs. They have taught large numbers of people to fly in the last few years. I was glad to learn from the Under-Secretary that there are more than 1,700 holders of A licences; with the holders of the B licences, the total flying membership is brought up to about 2,000. That number would make a sound cadre of flying personnel in the eventuality of war, and on that account and by the encouragement they give to our people to take to the air, I believe these clubs are doing a tremendous amount of good in furthering the interests of aviation.
I would like to say a few words on the air routes. I understand that before long the Indian-Australian route will be extended as far as Singapore. In view of the report that the Luft Hansa Company has been granted concessions or awarded a contract to establish a service from Berlin across Russia to China, I think the Under-Secretary ought to consider the possibility of extending our service beyond Singapore along the Pacific coast, and perhaps as far as Japan. That question might be investigated and a report sent to the Ministry. The advance made in the Cairo to the Cape route is satisfactory, everything being taken into consideration, and I was extremely glad to hear that a regular service will probably be in operation within the next few months. That leads me to the question of the west coast of Africa; and as possession is nine-tenths of the law, and those who are on the spot first usually gain some advantage, I ask the Under-Secretary whether he does not think it desirable to investigate the possibility of establishing an air service on the west coast of Africa? The question of the West Indies and Canada probaly does not come within the scope of the Ministry here, but that air route presents many possibilities, and I trust it may be taken into account in the contemplation of a comprehensive scheme of linking up all the air routes of the Empire for postal services.
I understand that in the United States of America, where great strides in aviation have been made during the last few years, the aeroplanes carrying the post are machines capable or doing 150 miles per hour. Speed will unquestionably be one of the determining factors of the future of aviation, and although we must pay every attention to safety, still, if we do not endeavour to improve the speed of our machines we may lose business and influence in competition with other countries. We ought to concentrate upon getting a higher speed machine for carrying the post than we have at the present time. In regard to what my hon. Friend the Member for Melton (Mr. Everard) said in connection with the possibility of carrying the ocean-borne mail from Galway to England, I had in mind that experiments on the same lines might be made with incoming steamers in the Channel. It would bring New York another 12 hours nearer to London if the mails could be collected from the steamers by air and brought by way of Plymouth to London, `with emergency landing grounds at, say, Taunton, and some convenient spot on Salisbury Plain. We also require an air line that will link up Northern Ireland and the industrial north with Amsterdam and the German services. I would like to know whether the Under-Secretary thinks such a service is a possibility and would prove an economic success. I should not advocate such a service unless the prospective business warranted it.
On the question of night flying I wish to draw attention to the night lines of the United States, which are lighted up over distances of thousands of miles. In Germany, too, large numbers of airways are illuminated by beacons set eight kilo-metres apart. I hope the Ministry will give consideration to the development of mail services and night flying in the near future. I am not in entire agreement with my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Chippenham (Captain Cazalet) when he said that airways ought to be regarded as complementary to the great steamship lines and the railroads. Looking forward over the next 20 or 30 years, and taking into consideration the development of this new science during the last generation, I think the time may come, and perhaps sooner than we anticipate, when in the matter of long-dis-
tance journeys the railroads and the steamship lines will become complementary to the air lines.

Major HILLS: It is a strange circumstance that we are discussing the development of the air service without being able to say anything of the great disaster that befell R 101. Of course, it is no fault of the Government that we have not yet the report of the inquiry before us. These matters have to be considered with extreme care. The comparative value of lighter than air and heavier than air transport is a question of immense importance in our Imperial communications. Many hon. Members in this House have expressed a definite opinion upon that question, and I ask the Under-Secretary to use his best endeavours to see that this question will be fully discussed. Previous speakers have made a very emphatic demand for an extended air service. That may be a very excellent thing, but hon. Members should bear in mind that, with the exception of two unimportant instances, no commercial air service in the world is being run on its own and unsubsidised. Although I am afraid that we shall have to spend more money on air services, we must not disregard the fact that it all costs money. Those who have preceded me in this Debate have left very little for me to say on the general question, and I will confine myself to commenting upon one or two matters and asking some questions of the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Debate, and I ask him to be good enough to answer my questions when he replies.
First of all, I should like to know the reason that delays the flight to Australia, and perhaps the representative of the Air Ministry will be able to tell us on what section it is now being held up. The hon. Member for Thanet (Captain Balfour) referred to Imperial Airways, and he told us that, although mails came here from Scandinavia, there was no mail from here to Scandinavia in British planes. Some time ago I attended a conference at Copenhagen, and, from what I saw there, I know that it would not pay us to carry air mails to Scandinavian countries. Consequently, we have to concentrate on the Imperial routes. I was very glad to welcome the admirable speech made by the hon. Member opposite who laid stress on the value
of quick communications inside the Empire which are bound to bring peace in their train.
Now I come to our old friend the Colwyn Report. I have pressed previous Governments to publish that report, and I believe its publication would not do any harm. I am told that that report very much favours the development of the air service for national defence. I do not know whether that is so or not, but I am sure its publication would not do any harm, and I hope the hon. Member who will reply to this Debate will make representations in the proper quarter, and that at long last, after waiting 41 these years and continually pressing the Government, that report will be placed in our hands.
My next question is whether the Government can do anything to encourage the manufacturers of aeroplanes in this country. We make the best aeroplanes in the world, but our trade in civil aeroplanes, especially of the large liner type, is very small compared with what is being done in Germany. I am inclined to think that if an exhibition of aeroplanes was held here it would show what excellent passenger-carrying planes we are making. We may be criticised because our planes are too slow, but great speed is not the only requirement, and safety is very important. I have flown in the planes of nearly every service in Europe, and I think that our services are by far the best and the safest. I think we should try to establish an export business in planes, because the demand of the world for aeroplanes is bound to increase, and I am sure that we could produce in this country the best planes in the world.
With regard to the postal air service, surely the time has arrived when our postal charges should he standardised. We pay the same stamp on a letter to French China as on one to Paris: and vet we are living in the 18th century as far as our air mail services are concerned. I know that at one time in our postal service we used to pay a separate rate to Birmingham, to Carlisle, and to Edinburgh—

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Dunnico): I am rather inclined to think that the question of air mails is a matter for the Posit Office, and not for the Air Ministry.

Major HILLS: I quite accept your correction, and I was going to suggest that the hon. Gentleman might consult the Postmaster-General. I have made my point. I should like now to say just one word about Imperial Airways. It was criticised by my hon. Friend the Member for Melton (Mr. Everard), who said that Imperial Airways was too big, that we ought to have smaller companies in charge of smaller local services, and that we should do better by breaking up the subsidy and spreading it out. That question has often been argued in this House, but I would submit that, of all services in the world, an air service is the one that requires centralisation, because, without immensely skilled care on the ground, you cannot get safety, and without the most efficient pilots you cannot get safety in the air either. You could not expect a small company to have that skilled personnel which a large concern like Imperial Airways can command. and it is just in these smaller services and with these smaller planes that I should expect the most unpleasant accidents to occur.
When people criticise the British service, I want to put before them the points that I should look to if I were called in and asked to express an opinion on some air service. I should ask, first of all, as to the standard of safety—the proportion of flights made without accident of any sort. Next I should ask how many of the journeys are completed journeys—in how many does the plane that starts on the route get to the end? We have a very large percentage. Ninety-four per cent. of the journeys that are started by imperial Airways, including the Indian service, are completed to the destination, and that is a far higher percentage than in any other country in the world. The third question that I should ask would be: How many of these planes get to their destination within a reasonable time? We all know that aeroplanes can fly fast, and we all know that., if all goes well, they can go from one point to another in a certain time; but what we want to know is that they will get there in time to catch the steamer or the train which starts from that place, and there again Imperial Airways have an immense superiority over the rest of the world.
9.0 p.m.
The next question that I should ask would be: How many machines are you using per 100 miles flown? That is a very important thing commercially, because the one thing in transport is always to keep your machines moving, and the fewer machines you can use per 100 miles flown the nearer you are to paying. My last question would be, how many ton-miles or passenger-miles have you got per plane? On the answers to these questions I should be able to express an opinion on the value of the service. But do not let the House forget the one thing that transcends everything else, namely, safety. It is not only that you want to spare suffering, but you want the air to be so safe that a passenger taking a ticket will not inquire or ask himself whether the air is more safe than a steamship or a train, but will just take the route which most pleases him and seems most convenient. For all these reasons, I think we have the best service of any in the world. It can be improved, no doubt; all human things are capable of improvement; but let us be certain that, when we criticise it, we are criticising it on right lines. Lastly, I think we are the only country which looks to unsubsidised flying, and looks forward to a time when our planes will fly without any subsidy at. all. On the bigger question of civil and military flying, I would say to the House that, the more you develop the civil side, the more you put the military side into the background. I quite agree that at present you can convert a big passenger plane into a military bomber, but, just as you get a differentiation between the warship and the passenger ship, so, as time goes on, you will get that differentiation in the aeroplane, and the more we get our people air-minded, and the more they get a civilian air mind and the less they think about military planes, fhe better.

Mr. MONTAGUE: I should like, first of all, in reference to this Amendment, to draw the attention of the House to the fact that as long ago as 1927 a Cabinet Committee exhaustively investigated the subject of civil aviation, and came to the view, which they expressed strongly, that we should concentrate on the development of long-distance Imperial lines, because those lines offered a prospect of ultimately becoming re-
munerative. That policy was supported in preference to frittering away our resources on short-distance services in Europe, apart from existing commitments. So far as Imperial Airways are concerned, I think that on the whole, realising that the British policy is a policy of reasonable safety first, and that our standards are high in that respect, it has shown slow, but nevertheless steady progress, representing, in regard to our Imperial routes and our continental services, a satisfactory and healthy condition of affairs. If the extension to Australia gets going—and I have already explained that there is a tentative scheme for the extension of air mail services from Calcutta to Australia by way of Rangoon and Singapore—then with the Indian and African services, we shall have cause for congratulation even in comparison with the services of other countries.
I would like to make a comparison, which I am sure will interest the House, in this respect. Some hon. Members and some writers in the Press have on occasion been pessimistic in their expressions with regard to our civil air services, but I do not think that that pessimism is justified, bearing in mind, of course, the geographical difference between this country and continental countries. I remember the story of the American who, when he was in an English railway train, expressed himself as fearful as to whether the train would run off the island. It is really the geographical position of this country that gives rise to difficulties in regard to the necessities and the possibilities of our development in civil aviation.
We must, of course, take Imperial figures for comparison. We find that, if we include the service from Cairo to the Cape, which, it is hoped, will be in full operation, not as early as June, as one hon. Member suggested, but more likely somewhere about July, there will be this year no fewer than 29,300 miles of air services in the British Empire, as against 24,650 for France, 17,900 for Germany and 10,700 for Holland. Of course, naturally, in view of the vast spaces of America, the figures for the United States are larger than ours. This comparison between British and continental services, shows, I think, that we are in a healthy
state, and that the pessimism of certain people on this subject is not quite justified.

Captain MAR GESSON: Could the hon. Gentleman give the figure for America?

Mr. MONTAGUE: The figure for America is 49,550 miles. The need for speeding-up the development of Imperial air routes is constantly before the Air Ministry, and efforts are continuously being directed to that end. The further extension of the service across and beyond India has been the subject of continuous consideration and discussion with the administrations concerned and with Imperial Airways, Limited. At the end of 1929 the Government of India inaugurated an air service from Karachi to Delhi with aircraft operated by Imperial Airways, Limited, under charter, and leave announced their intention to extend this service to Calcutta as an Indian State route. It is expected that this extension will be opened at the end of the present year.
I wanted to say something with regard to the question of the Indian service. The matter has been raised and some amount of doubt has been expressed as to the position. Under the Indian Post Office Act, the sole right of couveyance of mails in India is vested in the Governor-General in Council. The Government of India intend to organise an air service between Karachi and Calcutta for the conveyance of mails, passengers and goods, commencing at the end of this year, on the expiration of the present charter which Imperial Airways have, over the section from Karachi to Delhi. That service will run in connection with the Imperial Airways service to Karachi. In view of the probable separation of Burma from India, the Government of India do not propose to extend that Indian State service beyond Calcutta. When the Government of India received proposals for Dutch and French services across India, they were quite prepared to insist that mails should be dropped at the Western port of entry, that is Karachi, and picked up again at the Eastern port—Calcutta or Rangoon—such mails being sent across India by rail till such time as an Indian State service was prepared to take them across by air. It was upon the urgent representation of His Majesty's Government—this is quite
an important point in view of what has been said with regard to the Dutch service across India—who feared, I will not use the word reprisals, but, possibly, unfavourable repercussions by the Dutch or from the French in the Dutch East Indies and French Indo-China and possibly other countries traversed by the England-India air route, the Government of India agreed to allow the Dutch and the French to carry transit mails across India. They are not, however, using either of those services for the transmission of Indian mails.
In agreeing to this course, the Government of India stipulated clearly that Imperial mail carried by Imperial Airways should be handed over to the Indian State Air Service for conveyance by air from Karachi to Calcutta. A further item of information in this rather important matter is that the Dutch and the French pay the normal rates for housing and landing services within India. Wireless and meteorological services are provided free. No proposal has ever been made to the Government of India that Imperial Airways should be allowed to operate on similar terms to the Dutch and French. It has always been suggested that the Government of India should pay a subsidy to Imperial Airways. In view of pledges given from time to time in the Indian legislative assembly, a subsidy to any company other than an Indian company with rupee capital and a majority of Indian directors is out of the question. Those are facts which, I think, will satisfy all those who have taken part in the Debate and have referred to this question, and they are facts which I am happy to be able to give to the House. As regards the second great Imperial air route, that is the route to the Cape, I have already given the House the facts. The first aircraft on the preliminary service to East Africa left London on 28th February. It arrived at Mwanza in Tanganyika on the 10th of this month. The through route to the Cape should be in operation during the course of the summer. I have mentioned that probably it will he more like the end of July than the beginning of June.
As regards European air connections, the agreement with Imperial Airways,
Limited, provides for the regular operation of services to Paris, Brussels and Cologne. The question of the development of efficient day and night air routes by mail services linking up this country with various Continental centres is being examined, and improvements are being effected in the lighting of the Croydon air port and in the lighting of the air route on this side of the Channel in order to facilitate flying by night. Electric boundary lights are undergoing trial with a view to installing some form of lighting around the whole of the aerodrome during the current year, and with a view to assisting night flying aircraft when in the vicinity of the Surrey hills, a new beacon has been installed at Merstham, near Redhill. This will be the first of a new type of beacon.
So far as air connection between this country and Canada is concerned generally, I can only a this moment express a pious hope that we shall get on in the direction of the development of air services across the Atlantic, but the facts of the case are not sufficiently advanced for me to be able to say anything to very great purpose in that direction. Everything will be done in every way possible to develop such a service, especially in the interest of air cooperation between Canada and ourselves. It is the Air Ministry's policy to concentrate primarily on the Imperial routes rather than on short services to the Continent, since we feel that this is the best use we can make of the very limited funds at our disposal. With the inauguration of the Indian and African services, the Empire is beginning to be linked up by all-red routes, and we are taking all possible steps to extend the Indian service to Australia, although the actual tentative proposals at present are confined to air mails, and we must leave the question of a passenger service to later development. When these are accomplished, we shall have brought into being the main trunk routes which the Empire requires, and it will then be up to the British territories traversed by these trunk lines to put ribs to the backbone, as it were, in the form of feeder services.
If I may refer to the question of aerodrome discipline at Croydon, that is controlled from the control tower. I am
satisfied that the system is exceedingly efficient. It is true that the surface of Croydon aerodrome is not entirely satisfactory, but much attention is being paid to it. I went over the whole surface with the officials of the Ministry only a few days ago, and I am very much concerned about the condition of the surface there, especially in view of the new developments in heavier air liners, and so forth. But it is hoped that a certain amount of money may be found from this year's Estimates for the purpose of improving the surface. I can assure the House that the whole position is being watched, remembering, as the right hon. Gentleman said, that Croydon is the air port of the world. It ie the finest air port in the world, although I should like to say, since Tempelhof, Berlin, has been mentioned, there are some aspects of aerodrome maintenance and development we could properly apply in this country, especially on the social side. One of the things about the Berlin aerodrome is the fact that it is a real social centre for all kinds of social activities, and people flock there, with the result that there is a great development in air-mindedness. I think that, on the whole, the Ministry can claim, in view of the circumstances and the differences between Great Britain and the Continent, with our own peculiar problems, we are not, at any rate, as behind in the development of civil aviation as has been implied by some of the things which have been said by one or two hon. Members opposite.

Captain CAZALET: There is the question about West Africa.

Mr. MONTAGUE: There has been an investigation and a report as to the possibility of West African services, but all I can say at the moment is, that the Air Ministry realise the importance of development in West Africa. For the moment, however, it must be subsidiary to the Central African route; we must get that going. There are questions with regard to feeder lines and so on, and the whole question is fully in the mind of the Ministry.

Captain CAZALET: In view of what the hon. Gentleman has said, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Supply accordingly considered in Committee.

[Mr. DUNNICO in the Chair].

NUMBER OE AIR FORCE.

Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a number of Air Forces not exceeding 32,000, all ranks, be maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom at Homo and abroad, exclusive of those serving in India (other than Aden), during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932.

Mr. SORENSEN: I beg to move to-reduce the Vote by 30,000 men.
In moving this Amendment, which stands in my name and in the names of several of my hon. Friends, I confess that I feel—to use a metaphor—as if I were suddenly landing on the earth again. After the very interesting and delightful dissertation on the development of civil aviation, to which we have listened during the past three or four hours, it is rather difficult to realise that we are discussing to-night Estimates which come under the heading of Fighting Services. I should have been quite prepared to listen for a much longer period to the exchange of ideas and of compliments which we have heard, but one must come back to earth and realise that we are considering now Estimates for the Fighting Services. The intention in my mind in moving this reduction is, obviously, to draw attention to a method by which disarmament, and, in consequence, permanent peace, may be secured. I confess that I feel very much like a personified paradox. I am very conscious, indeed, of a whole host of criticisms which may come from various quarters of the Committee.
Personally, when I speak to this Amendment I am not speaking on behalf of my constituency, or of any considerable number of my constituents. I will be perfectly frank and admit that in my constituency the number who would be prepared to endorse what I am moving and suggesting to-night might be counted almost on the fingers of both hands. I also quite frankly admit that I am not now pleading for a method which has the endorsement of the Labour movement. The method which has that endorsement and which in the end is able to secure peace and disarmament, is a method of
disarmament by agreement, rather than a method of disarmament by example. I would go further respecting my constituency, and with regard to other constituencies, too, and say that if it were really explained to the electorate of this country what this particular method really involved, and all that it implied, I am prepared fully to admit that it would be rejected by the great majority of electors in this country. I do not believe that it would be at all right and expedient for this Committee to pass such an Amendment as this without at the same time securing endorsement from the electors of this country.
I do not wish, personally, that the method here advocated, bound up as it is in the recommendation of what is practically the abolition of the Air Force, should be secured by a back-door method. I am convinced that any kind of subterfuge is entirely out of place with regard to the establishment of such a titanic and challenging method of securing peace as the one embodied in the Amendment which I am now moving. I realise all the difficulties and dangers which are implied in the method which I now commend. I appreciate to the full all the arguments that can be brought forward. I have not tried to ignore the other side of the case. I fully admit that at first it would seem that common sense is overwhelmingly against my Amendment, not merely from the standpoint of those who are cynical with regard to idealism, but also from the standpoint of those who are genuinely in favour of peace and of the great work which the League of Nations is accomplishing. From that standpoint, I can appreciate the argument that sanctions are required in order to enforce judgments, such as an institution like the League of Nations might be able to announce and to apply.
Having said that, and having expressed quite frankly and definitely my sensitiveness to the criticisms that can be offered, and to the arguments that can be used against the intention of this Amendment, nevertheless, I move the Amendment with sincerity, determination and reason. I do so because, after all, the Members of this House are not mere automatic delegates of the constituents they represent. I fully realise that it would be outrageous for any Member who persistently mis-
represented the opinions of the party which he represented, and which had largely secured his votes, to continue in this House for long. Therefore, generally speaking, I believe it is expedient and right that Members who are here representing various parties should endeavour to express that party view. On the other hand, there are occasions, and this is one of them, when having made one's position perfectly clear, one must speak out the truth as one sees it, and become not merely a delegate but a representative of an idea, even though that idea may not be popular or acceptable to the great majority of people.
The basis of the Amendment which I am moving, is, obviously, that disarmament is highly desirable. That is accepted on all sides in a greater or lesser degree. I say that because there are some—I hope only a minority—who do not believe Disarmament is desirable, and who believe from time to time that a little bloodletting is very useful and valuable to the body politic. But I assume that the great majority, though extremely sceptical as to the near or far possibility of Disarmament, are nevertheless desirous of seeing at some time real and complete Disarmament accomplished. On the other hand I am quite certain that the majority of Members of this House who agree amout Disarmament also insist that Disarmament must come by agreement and not by example. It is plain that the great majority here who believe in Disarmament by agreement must, by that fact, admit that the drawing together, the conjunction and the identification of the military and violent side of aviation with the excellent functions of commercial aviation, is a thing to he deplored, and one which, in due course, must be brought to an end.
Nothing, surely, is so depressing, and nothing stirs one so deeply as the fact that many of the most ingenious instruments that the human mind has ever evolved are instruments, in the last analysis, of death rather than of life. Everyone must admire the aesthetic appearance of the aeroplane when it passes across the sky, and everyone must be impressed equally by the long development of thought and invention that has gone to make the aeroplane one of the most marvellous embodiments of
human ingenuity. One cannot either avoid the fact that that same instrument, when one sees it in action, is an instrument which one knows can, within a few moments, be turned into an instrument which can deal death and spread torment and torture not only to combatants but to non-combatants also. One can admire even the devilry of the instrument, and at the same time regret the use to which it is put. A colleague of ours who brings into one of the rooms of this institution half the British Museum in the course of a single week, has brought not only living specimens but strange objects of a much more sinister character. From time to time he asks us to examine swords, daggers and scimitars which originally came from the mysterious East but which, I rather assume, came more directly from the more mysterious East End. We examine such instruments, and while we admire the meticulous work and the clasps, handles and blades we cannot do that for long without realising that these clever, ingenious and highly-finished instruments may be put—though we trust not by his hands—to a more degrading and terrible use.
So it is with aeroplanes. One reflects on aeroplanes and the tremendous possibilities that are inherent in them, of the gulfs that can be bridged and the way in which the vacant spaces of the world can be crossed, and lonely communities linked together. I am all in favour of the diminution of the world, so that instead of other parts being foreign, they merely become our neighbours—and our next-door neighbours at that. One cannot ignore the fact. that at present this new and marvellous instrument of communication is, as a matter of fact, also a potential instrument of destruction and torment as well. I mention that, because it brings me to the real reason and motive which has led me with, perhaps, some timidity and hesitation, but with determination, to move this Amendment. In other words, it is because I realise that war has grown to be an institution, and that nations have developed the habit of thinking in terms of war, that I urge that while peace through Disarmament by agreement may be possible—and I do not rule it out yet—equally it may break down. One knows that with two indi-
viduals one can secure agreement for sacrifices, for alterations and adjustments, but one also knows among such individuals one of them may possess suspicion and a temperament different from the other and be over-weighted by fear, and in this way tilt the balance which is carefully being adjusted between the various partners who are seeking agreement. Among the nations of the world an effort is being and has been made by this Government and other Governments, past and present, towards securing an international mind and a realisation that law is above war. All that has my heartiest and warmest endorsement, but I realise that one nation may be hypnotised by fear and fascinated by suspicion and may tilt the balance and may give an excuse, if not a reason, to the other nations to cease to try to arrive at Disarmament by agreement, and, instead, start a mad competition in the instruments of war which, inevitably, increases the tension between nations, and ultimately plunges them into international strife once more. Yet it is certainly strange to realise that every one of the great Powers to-day in effect says, "We should be quite prepared to disarm if it were not for the other fellow."
In our own country, which Power is it that we fear to-day? Why is it that when Disarmament by example is possible and would lead to other countries following suit, inevitably there are many Members who say, "Yes, but we must count the cost, for we know full well that if we do that, other nations would not follow us, and we might have to suffer very severely for this extraordinary experiment." Precisely the same argument is being used by the other Powers. France is saying the same thing—"We would disarm and divest our Air Force of its violent and military features if only we could be sure other nations would do the same thing." So we have the strange sitution of the great Powers each accusing one another of insincerity while at the same time they meet round a table and quite sincerely protest that each one of them intends to take no more part in war, but, instead to seek peace and ensure it for evermore.
I suggest that in such psychological circumstances we have to realise that it may be necessary—I believe that it is
necessary, and I put it forward for the consideration of other hon. Members—to make a clean break with tradition. It may be necessary to break through this entail of fear and suspicion. War has grown to be an institution. It was not always so. There was a time when it was perhaps a spontaneous expression of slumbering fear, anger and animosity that rankled in the breasts of men, but to-day it has become an institution. No great nation says that it wants to destroy or to be destroyed. No community says that it wants to engage in or to promote or be involved in the horrors of war, yet, in spite of that fact, Mars hypnotises millions of the children of men. We need to break right through and give a challenge, even a shock, to these hypnotising assumptions which rest on the souls of men and which paralyse their activities and even paralyse States and statesmen as well.
If disarmament by example is a dangerous method, is it not a fact that we are all engaged in it, more or less to-day? A number of States meet at some international conference. They do not speak at one time and in the same voice. It is left to some power to intervene. I am happy to believe that in some respects the statesmen of this country have given a lead and set an example. Our own Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has set an example. Our own Prime Minister during his visit to America, shortly after he had assumed his high office, set an example which met with a response. It need not be merely Labour statesmen who set an example. I believe that it is equally true, in some measure at least, of statesmen who belong to other parties. They know that if they set an example they will see a certain response from others who have been waiting for a lead.
It is well to realise that outside the realm of military, naval and aerial competition we are quite prepared to make considerable innovations. The nations of the world are continually rivalling one another in discovering fresh means whereby they may prove their mechanical, their scientific or even their ethical superiority. There seems to be too great a distinction between invention and innovation. They are prepared to invent but they are not prepared to
innovate. There is no fundamental difference between the willingness of people to invent some new thing and set the pace for the rest of the world and, on the other hand, the willingness of the community to invent a new method and at the same time to expect other nations to follow suit.
Lastly, and may I state this very emphatically, I am not proposing this Amendment on the ground that it is wrong to kill in all circumstances; it may or it may not be. That is not my argument. I am not proposing my Amendment on the ground that it is wrong to restrain. I am simply suggesting by this Amendment that it is well for us to consider that whilst other methods may be possible and desirable and even effective there is yet another method, and that is the method of example which may be more effective still. It is a positive endeavour to realise what I would call the co-operative tendencies of the human race. As I see it, human nature is very much like a garden. Those who go into the garden to water weeds will produce a very fine crop of docks and thistles. On the other hand, those who are determined to weed out the docks and thistles and other foetid growths of the garden will fertilise and nurture nature. So in our human relations, the co-operative tendencies will produce a very much better harvest than the tendencies which I deplore.
Those who are always assuming that man is a ruthless brute willing and ready to pounce upon his fellow creature, by that very assumption, by the constant insistence upon that assumption, will encourage those very undesirable tendencies that are in human nature. On the contrary, those who assume that there are other tendencies, the co-operative tendencies, tendencies which in the end will lead men to realise that their highest interest lies not in strife but in concord and in mutual good will; those who realise that the other tendencies are there but still believe in encouraging the better tendencies, although those tendencies may be weak, will strengthen them and nourish them. The Amendment that I am moving is based upon that assumption. It is based, if you like, upon the colossal assumption, the ridiculous assumption that a great collective moral act by our nation would have a
profound and far-reaching effect upon the rest of the peoples of the world. I realise all the criticisms that can be applied to this Amendment. I have considered them very carefully and I know how powerful they are, and, if you like, how inconsistent I am in accepting this position, riddled through as it is with inconsistencies, because I believe that many of us who preach peace merely want to allow the same passion for war to have a less developed expression.
I would put it this way, how can anyone who does believe in moral force having validity really accept the extraordinary assumption, which most people accept to-day, that only the method of agreement, only the method of collective adjustment, only the method which comes by the elimination of suspicion and force, only the method of blindfold justice will enable us at last to be free of the nightmare of another war. Those who believe that there are vaster powers in the universe than the normal man calculates, must believe that there is something in the argument which I advance. There is a great deal in it. Certainly, there is a challenge embodied in this Amendment, but it is a challenge which does not cast any reflection on those who are engaged in our Air Force at the present time. I know that they are just normal human beings like ourselves. I know that they, for the most part, do not wish to engage in strife any more than we do. I know full well, whether they be in this House or outside, that those who still support the Fighting Services, whether of this particular branch or of any other branch, do not want title day to come when these ingenious, attractive, marvellous instruments, devised by human thought and human skill, will be put to such terrible usage as that to which I have referred. I am casting no reflection nor am I assuming that I have some superior position. I merely suggest, and I can do no other, that, out of my own intuition, if you like, out of my own inner convictions, the time has arrived in this connection, as in history in other connections, when a voice must be raised and a challenge must be made to the suggestion pit forward that what we need is growth in the wrong thinking that has too long prevailed.
Except on one occasion when under a misapprehension I went into the "No" Lobby I have not voted against my Gov-
ernment, and it is therefore with great regret that I shall have to vote not against my Government to-night but against a philosophy which my Government is forced to support under existing circumstances. I shall not vote against my Government but against a philosophy which is and which must be accepted by both sides until the people of this country are converted to the strange extension of faith I have endeavoured very faultily to express to-night. But in voting for the Amendment, I do so with sincerity and determination, and in the hope and belief that in some way the evidence and witness I make will pass beyond this House and register itself in the minds of the people of this country and help them to realise that there is another way, not practised very much at the moment but which may be practised on a larger scale in the future, by which this country by its powerful moral example will attract other nations into the same track and lead the way to certain disarmament and peace.

Captain BALFOUR: I do not know whether the hon. Member for Leyton West (Mr. Sorensen) will be able to square his action with his Government as well as apparently he can square his action with his conscience. Whether his Chief Whip will consider that in voting for this Amendment he is not voting against the Government is a matter which will doubtless be considered within the inner administration of the Socialist party. We have heard from the lion. Member one of those speeches which have such a certain charm of airy sentimentality and a great deal of impracticability, and we on this side cannot allow it to go without some answer. The hon. Member spoke about blood letting in the body politic. Apparently, he thinks that a little word letting does no harm and we can excuse the sentimentality of the hon. Member on that ground. I did not know whether he was going to vote for the Amendment or not; I did not quite gather whether his words were an apologia or an apology. I gather that finally they were an apologia, because he said that it was his determination to go into the Lobby for the Amendment. At any rate, if he prolongs his airy sentimentality to its logical conclusion in the Division Lobby we do not mind.
I should like to ask him to consider for a moment what will be the effect of this reduction if it is passed. After all, it is a serious matter, and when you travel on your pedal extremities into the Lobby, you are doing a positive action. Suppose hon. Members followed him, what would happen to-morrow morning? So far as the Air Force is concerned to-morrow morning it would be to all intents and purposes non-existent. [Interruption.] Hon. Members who say "Hear, hear" to that proposal have been returned to Parliament to help to do away with unemployment and instead they would be putting something like 30,000 more people out of employment. Doubtless, their constituencies would thank them for such action. The whole idea is impracticable. The Government has expressed its desire in a logical manner. We on this side may think that they are going too far, but at any rate they are doing something for disarmament, and hon. Members opposite have no right to quarrel with the practical steps which are being taken by the Government, which are even more advanced than we on this side approve. The aesthetic appearance of an aeroplane flying through the sky are the words of approbation which the hon. Member was able to bestow on the Air Force. Some of those who appreciate the aesthetic appearance of an aeroplane flying in the sky would not appreciate the aesthetic appearance of an aeroplane hitting the ground.
It is absurd to treat the Royal Air Force as a toy for sentimental theories, to be ballooned about by hon. Members opposite who while dealing with these airy sentimentalities think they are doing some good. On the contrary, they do nothing constructive. They do not even follow the constructive lead of their own Front Bench. Again, there is that mental snobbishness so apparent in the speeches of hon. Members opposite, who think that nobody else is willing to stand by ideals, or good desires and no more war. Those who served in the War probably want war less than anybody else, and some hon. Members opposite are certainly not entitled to say whether they do or do not desire war on the ground of personal experience. We shall back
up the Government in standing by the maintenance of security. We think the Government go too far, but that is a matter of opinion; but we shall back them up in maintaining national security, which is essential to-day until we get the world of idealism about which the hon. Member dreams. About 2,000 years hence his dream may come true, but if he wakes up during the next 50 years when our children are living in this land and his dream comes true he will find this country not fit for those children, but fit only for the occupation of those who will overrun our land.

Mr. BECKETT: I do not propose to follow the hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Thanet (Captain Balfour) into the airy persiflage with which he has treated the subject and the hon. Member who moved the Amendment. I had the privilege of moving a similar Amendment on another Estimate, and I was amazed at the tremendous volume of correspondence I received from almost every civilised country in the world expressing agreement and sympathy with the point. of view which was put. We are being asked to vote £18,000,000 to the Air Force, making a total of £200,000,000 expended on the Air Forces of this country during the past 11 years. The irony of that is this, that after spending £200,000,000, for which money more useful and practical purposes could have been found, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary cannot claim, even from his expert knowledge, that we have an Air Force which is anything like the most powerful in the world. We are to spend £200,000,000 which we can ill afford in constructing a defective weapon which has not even the virtue of being a weapon that can compete on equal terms with that of at least four other countries in the world.
Even its most ardent defenders will not say that it is a weapon that can be used for defence, for it is a purely offensive weapon. The Under-Secretary, who replied to us very courteously and logically last year, made out an excellent case from his own point of view. He has always taken a genuine and sincere line. But even he would not claim that the Air Force is a defensive weapon. The best that he could say was that if anyone for some unexplained reason thought of launching an uncalled-for aeroplane
attack upon us, that nation would be deterred from doing so by the fact that we had an Air Force which could retaliate in kind; if anyone committed the barbarous atrocity of dropping bombs on inoffensive people here, the Air Force could reply by killing an equal number of defenceless people in the country of our attackers. That seems to me a tremendously impracticable ideal when money is being stinted on every hand, when the Government, greatly against their will, are being forced to practise the most stringent economy in the ease of the most urgent social necessities.
There is not a single right hon. or hon. Gentleman on any of the Front Benches who will get up and give the slightest indication of how when or where this very expensive weapon of offence is to he used. I am not making any accusations of insincerity. While I disagree most strongly with those right hon. and hon. Gentlemen as to the best method of securing peace, I believe that every one of us is equally genuine in the desire to obtain peace. I emphasise my belief that not one of the occupants of the three Front Benches can mention any possible use against any possible nation to which they can put this expensive weapon. If they could do so the position would be even more ridiculous than it is now. I notice that hon. Members opposite are always very anxious that we should not copy Russia, but whenever they come to this one black spot on the Russian record it appears to be the one thing that they wish to copy. They cannot have it both ways. I do not think that any responsible member of the party opposite will get up and tell us that he wants to spend £18,000,000 on an Air Force this year with a view to using it against Russia. Such a statement would be left to more irresponsible Members.
10.0 p.m.
The absurdity of calling us impracticable is this: Hon. Members opposite may think that it would be a great tragedy if our Amendment were carried and if by some miracle the Air Force were disbanded. But what is the alternative tragedy to disarmament? It is to use the armaments that we are creating. We are not a council deliberating about airy sentimentalities, whether it be jingoism on the one hand or pacifism on the other;
we are a council deciding where in the future safety lies. I suggest that safety cannot lie, never has lain and never will lie on the side of large and expensive armaments. Any safety that armaments can guarantee is automatically knocked out of existence by the fact that other nations endeavour to obtain the same kind of safety. No man or woman wants to declare war, but when every nation is messing about and spending money on armaments for the destruction of human beings, and when thousands of keen young men are being trained permanently in the use of destructive weapons, it is only human nature that eventually they will desire to use those weapons. If that is not the case the whole folly of training them is exposed.
If statesmen are sent into a conference with destructive squadrons of aeroplanes behind them, there is a tendency to use that last and deadly argument as it has been used in the past. For all these reasons, I put it that the practical business point of view is not to go on spending money that we cannot afford in preparing for an emergency that will destroy us, but to put aside these things and to concentrate our minds on a better and more generous way of obtaining national safety. I do not apologise for the vote that I intend to cast in the Division Lobby. It has always been very well understood in this party that points of view on this particular question cut across ordinary party definitions. Exponents of disarmament by agreement and disarmament by example both have the right on these Estimates to put their point of view. In that opinion, I believe the minority of the House to-day will be the majority in a very short time. I believe that it is the practical, the businesslike, and the ethical way out, and I hope the Lobby to-night will show an increase on the vote which we recorded last year.

Mr. EVERARD: We have just listened to a most illogical speech from the hon. Member opposite. I understood him to support the proposition that the Air Force should be reduced from 32,000 personnel to 2,000. In support of that he tells us that in the last 11 years we have spent £200,000,000 upon our Air Force, and he goes on to say practically that we have not spent enough during
those 11 years because, as a matter of fact, we have not got a stronger Air Force than have some Continental nations at the present time. In other words, what he is telling us is that we ought to have spent considerably more than £200,000,000 during the last 11 years, and that we ought to have the best and largest Air Force it is possible to have.

Mr. BECKETT: I am sure the hon. Member does not want to misrepresent what I was trying to say, if I expressed it badly. I wanted to say that the alternatives were either to have the best Air Force, which could conquer any other country, or to have none at all, but it seems to me ridiculous to spend so much money on having a half-and-half Air Force. I personally made it clear that I preferred to spend none at all.

Mr. EVERARD: The hon. Member takes up the most extraordinary position. If he is going to say that every time we spend any money, we ought to spend so much that we shall have something better than anybody else, we must be in a much better financial position than anybody else to do so, and his argument is really ludicrous. I would remind him that the amount which we are spending on our Air Force has shown practically no increase at all during the last 10 or 11 years, and we have heard that during that period very large additions indeed have been made to the Air Force expenditure of most of the larger countries in Europe and the United States of America. I would remind the hon. Member opposite, who has, I believe, a very peculiar interest in the question of Russia, that even in that country to-day, I understand, they are spending approximately double the amount on their Air Force that we consider necessary to spend on ours.

Mr. BECKETT: On a point of Order. Is there any way of asking the hon. Member what he meant when he said I was peculiarly interested in Russia?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Lieut.-Colonel Spender-Clay): I do not think the speech of the hon. Member for Melton (Mr. Everard) was in any way provocative, and I do not think the hon. Member for Peckham (Mr. Beckett) is entitled to call him to order.

Mr. HAYCOCK: Why did he mention Russia?

Mr. EVERARD: When we are discussing the amount of money necessary to spend on our own Air Force, we are bound to take into consideration the amount of money which is spent by other nations in Europe, and I was merely pointing out that Russia, which is of such particular interest to hon. Members opposite, is spending very nearly twice the amount of money on her Air Force that we are spending on ours. I think that he and his friends would be far better advised to try to persuade nations like that to reduce their Air Force expenditure to something approximating what we spend in this country.

Mr. HAYCOCK: May I ask whether the Russian Government are not in favour of the total abolition of all armaments, and have made proposals at Geneva to that effect?

Mr. EVERARD: I do not know what the Russian Government are in favour of. All that I know is that the amount of money spent on the Russian Air Force is what I have already said. I would remind the hon. Member who has just spoken that the great bulk of the activities of the Air Force at present are not activities for destruction at all. I may remind him, in case he has forgotten, that last year a great many lives were saved at the time of the troubles between the North-West frontier of India and Afghanistan by sending Air Force planes to bring back women and children and men who might have lost their lives had there been no such facilities available.

Mr. AYLES: Seeing that the hon. Member has mentioned the aeroplanes of the Indian Royal Air Force that went into Kabul, may I ask him whether they went with any arms at all or without arms? There is a White Paper issued by the Government which says that they went without any kind of arms and even without cameras, so that in a perfectly inoffensive way they could do an errand of mercy.

Mr. EVERARD: I am not interested whether these machines, which did not belong to the Indian Government but to the Government of this country, on that particular occasion carried arms or not. That is a matter of no importance.

Mr. AYLES: That is the whole point.

Mr. EVERARD: What I am pointing out is that some of the personnel which the hon. Members opposite are endeavouring to do away with altogether were used last year in saving the lives of people, women and children, who would probably have lost their lives if there had not been those facilities available. The hon. Member knows that very well, and it does not make any difference whether those aeroplanes carried arms or armaments. They were military aeroplanes, and they were used for peace purposes. My point is that 99 per cent. of the work of the Air Force to-day is for peace purposes, and when the hon. Member comes here, with no effort at all to deal with the question of unemployment, and tells us solemnly that he is going to put out of employment another 30,000 people, who are doing excellent work and who are not any provocation to anybody, it is like coming and suggesting that we should do away with the police force in this country. I can quite imagine hon. Members like the two hon. Members opposite who have spoken to-day seriously coming before this House on the Home Office Estimates and suggesting that the police force, because on some occasion they may have hit somebody with a truncheon, should be abolished.
So far as we on these benches are concerned, we intend to support the Under-Secretary of State in order that we may keep the Air Force at this size. It is only a force for the defence of our air routes and for the protection of ourselves, and not only has it been of advantage from that point of view, but it has been of very great advantage to my hon. Friends who wish to avoid war, as we all do, in those parts of the country where, if troops had been employed, there would have been far more bloodshed than there has been by the use of aeroplanes.

Mr. MESSER: My support of this Amendment, quite frankly, is because I believe aerial warfare to be the most barbarous instrument that has been devised by man. It would rank along with poison gas, but there is some discrimination in the use of poison gas that is not possible in the use of aeroplanes. One can fancy that in certain circumstances even poison gas may be defended.
One can understand the argument that when bodies of men are facing each other, their object being destruction, any method of destruction may be excused. But it is difficult to reconcile with our ideas of justice the argument that because a raiding band of robbers has been responsible for some outrage, a village in which there are women and children should be bombed. Civilisation, in arriving at its present stage, has devised means of warfare which, years ago, would have been considered most unfair, and, if it were possible for the nations to agree no longer to use aeroplanes as a means of military offence, the world would heave a great sigh of relief and we would feel that a step had been taken towards real disarmament. Nobody is going to criticise this Government for their foreign policy and the efforts which they have made in the direction of peace, but when we are discussing disarmament by agreement it always appears to be that there are bodies of men who are haggling as to who will be best off at the end of the agreement.
I support the Amendment because I believe that, if we make a gesture of this kind we shall be in a much stronger position when we go into a disarmament conference, having already made a step in the direction of real disarmament. I emphasise the point that we have always justified the Army and the Navy from the standpoint of defence. The old naval three-power standard was based on the idea that we had an enormous coast line and the smallness of our Army in comparison with Continental armies was because it was not so important from the standpoint of defence. The argument of defence cannot be used of aeroplanes. They are no defence. They can only be used as a threat against the defenceless and, even if warfare could be justified, that is something which I could not support. Lastly, I do not think that the expense is worth while. I believe that if we could devote a little of this money to educating the people—
Were half the power that fills the world with terror,
Were half the wealth that's spent on camps and courts
Given to redeem the human mind from error,
There were no need for arsenals arid forts.
To call for economy on social services when we can afford £18,000,000 for destructive services seems to me a contradiction and I support this Amendment because I think the whole idea of aerial warfare is wrong.

Mr. TINKER: I occupy a peculiar position to-night in being in opposition to back-bench Members on my own side on this question, but I think the time has come when those of us who hold certain views on these matters ought not to shirk our responsibilities, but ought to speak out and state the reasons why we support the Estimates to carry on these services. I wish to say emphatically that while the world remains as it is I am for defending this country. I can speak with some experience. If anyone can say that the horrors of war have been impressed upon him I can say so. I am for disarmament just as much as anybody else and in what I say I do not mean to imply that other Members holding other views are not as sincere as I am. But I wish to point out why I cannot see the wisdom of seeking to bring about disarmament by example. If I thought that was practicable, I would willingly accept the idea, but I submit that we would be putting ourselves in a difficult position with other nations if we adopted that principle. We should simply become defenceless, and what would the citizens think of a Parliament which let the country get into that position?
The Mover of the Amendment, whose earnestness and sincerity I do not doubt, said that other countries would be willing to disarm if this country disarmed. We have shown, as the Naval Conference made clear, that we are willing to go a long way with other nations towards Disarmament. We must trust to the men in charge. The First Lord of the Admiralty, the Secretary of State for War, and the Under-Secretary of State for Air are as eager for Disarmament as anyone. It is just a question of method, and those who support the Government wholeheartedly—and we do so, not through any pressure—are convinced that their present method is the only safe way to Disarmament. Although I never like to go against my friends who are with me on other matters, I
felt that it was time that a back bencher let the Front Bench know that we are with them in the policy which they are carrying out. I urge them to follow the line that they have taken up of appealing to other countries to disarm, for they cannot leave the country unprotected while other nations are armed.

Mr. MONTAGUE: Perhaps the Committee will allow me to say a word upon the discussion of this Amendment, so that we can get to the other Votes. I have not the slightest reason to complain of the way in which this Amendment has been presented. The speech of the hon. Member for West Leyton (Mr. Sorensen) was a speech to which no one could object, although I am bound to disagree with the philosophy that he expressed. It was very moderate in tone; indeed, all the speeches that have been made in support of the Amendment have been of a moderate character, and the position has been put in a very philosophic manner. I understand the position of hon. Members who support the Amendment, and I cannot object to it being put down in the name of pacifist propaganda, because it is no doubt desirable to give periodically ideals an airing. The past speaker put the position which is represented not only by the Front Bench, but by the overwhelming majority in the Committee. If we could see our way to start disarmament by example we should be only too happy to start it. Those of us who are supporting this Estimate are just as peace loving as any section of the House—it is only a difference of methods; but there is one slight inconsistency, or what appears to me to be an inconsistency, in the attitude of my hon. Friends which I would like to point out. Hon. Members below the Gangway take the view that no defence is the best defence. There may be some philosophic justification for that view, but I cannot see that anyone can hold that view and immediately go on to talk about the bombing of defenceless villages and defenceless citizens, and about the aeroplane not being a defensive weapon but an aggressive weapon. If the best defence is no defence, that surely applies to the desert and the frontier as well as to London. Hon. Members cannot have it both ways. If it is possible for British aeroplanes or the aeroplanes of any other country to bomb defenceless villages it
is surely possible for the aeroplanes of our Continental neighbours to bomb a defenceless London.

Mr. HAYCOCK: Is that your defence?

Mr. MONTAGUE: I am putting my case. I am merely endeavouring to put before the Committee the view that the case which has been submitted is a little bit illogical. If it be true that defenceless people can be bombed, and that is the objection to the use of aeroplanes in aggressive warfare, then it seems to me that London is obviously just as much open to attack, and if London is defenceless it is in an inferior position. I put that view forward in no provocative way. I do not think the situation calls for a provocative speech from me. The Debate has not been provocative, it has been exceedingly interesting, and I have been long enough in contact with my friends and with the movement of which they are members with me to understand, perhaps better than hon. Members opposite, what their point of view is from the standpoint of the ethics of the situation. But that philosophy, which has been put forward so moderately and

reasonably, and I have no doubt with such sincerity, is not necessarily a Socialist philosophy. It may be held by anybody, whatever his political opinions may be, and in my opinion it is the anarchist philosophy, though I am not condemning it necessarily on that account. It is precisely the attitude of mind of the anarchists 40 years ago, who thought they were the left wing of the Labour movement of this country of that day. They said that if we abolished policemen we should abolish crime. Hon. Members below the Gangway say that if we abolish armaments in a unilateral sense we shall abolish aggression on the part of those who still retain armaments. I wish t could believe that that were true, and then I should be wholeheartedly in support of this Motion; but I cannot believe it and therefore I am afraid that I must resist the Amendment, although it has been put so reasonably and moderately

Question put, "That a number, not exceeding 2,000 all ranks, he maintained for the said Service."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 12; Noes, 248.

Division No. 197.]
AYES.
[10.30. p.m.


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Kirkwood, D.
Wellock, Wilfred


Brockway, A. Fenner
Longden, F.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester.Loughb'gh)


Buchanan, G.
Masser, Fred



Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Sandham, E.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.


Kinley, J.
Simmons, C. J.
Mr. Sorensen and Mr. Ayles.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Ferguson, Sir John


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Carver, Major W. H.
Foot, Isaac


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)


Ammon, Charles George
Charleton, H. C.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke)


Angell, Sir Norman
Clarke, J. S.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Arnott, John
Cluse, W. S.
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)


Aske, Sir Robert
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Gill, T. H.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Gillett, George M.


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Colville, Major D. J.
Glassey, A. E.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Compton, Joseph
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Barnes, Alfred John
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Gossling, A, G.


Barr, James
Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Gould, F.


Batey, Joseph
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Daggar, George
Gray, Milner


Benson, G.
Dallas, George
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Dalton, Hugh
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Birkett, W. Norman
Davies, Maj. Geo.F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Bourne, Captain Robert Crott
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Groves, Thomas E.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Denman, Hon. R. D,
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)


Bromfield, William
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Brooke, W.
Dukes, C.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Brothers, M.
Duncan, Charles
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)
Ede, James Chuter
Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Edge, Sir William
Haycock, A. W.


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hayday, Arthur


Burgess, F. G.
Edwards. E. (Morpeth)
Hayes, John Henry


Burgin, Dr, E. L.
Egan, W. H.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Burton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Elmley, Viscount
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Caine, Derwent Hell-
Everard, W. Lindsay
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd,Henley)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Milner, Major J.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Herriotts, J.
Montague, Frederick
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Hoffman, P. C.
Morley, Ralph
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Strauss, G. R.


Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Isaacs, George
Mort, D. L.
Sullivan, J.


Jenkins, Sir William
Muff, G.
Sutton, J. E.


Johnston, Thomas
Muggeridge, H. T.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Muirhead, A. J.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Murnin, Hugh
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Lang, Gordon
Naylor, T. E.
Thomson, Sir F


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Noel Baker, P. J.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Lathan, G.
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Thurtle, Ernest


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Tillett, Ben


Lawrence, Susan
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Tinker, John Joseph


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Palin, John Henry.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Leach, W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Perry, S. F.
Toole, Joseph


Lees, J.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Tout, W. J.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Pole, Major D. G.
Townend, A. E.


Lindley. Fred W.
Potts, John s.
Train, J.


Little, Graham-, Sir Ernest
Price, M. P.
Viant, S. P.


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Pybus, Percy Joan
Walker, J.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Quibell, D. J. K.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Logan, David Gilbert
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Wallace, H. W.


Longbottom, A. W.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Lovat-Fraser, J. A.
Remer, John R.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Lunn, William
Richards, R.
Watkins, F. C.


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Watson, w. M. (Dunfarmi[...]lne)


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Wells, Sydney R.


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Ritson, J.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Romerll, H. G.
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Westwood, Joseph


McElwee, A.
Rowson, Guy
White, H. G.


McEntee, V. L.
Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Lady wood)


MeKinlay, A.
Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


MacLaren, Andrew
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Sandeman. Sir N. Stewart
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


MacNelli-Weir, L.
Sanders, W. S.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Savery, S. S.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Mansfield, W.
Sawyer, G. F.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Marcus, M.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Womersley, W. J.


Margesson, Captain H. D.
Shaw, Rt. Hon Thomas (Preston)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Marley, J.
Sherwood, G. H.
Young, R. S. (Islington. North)


Marshall, Fred
Shield, George William



Mathers, George
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Middleton, G.
Shillaker, J. F.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


Millar. J. D.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)



Original Question put, and agreed to.

PAY, ETC., OF THE AIR FORCE.

Resolved,
That a sum, not exceeding £3,907,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Pay, etc., of His Majesty's Air Force at Home and abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932.

WORKS, BUILDINGS AND LANDS.

Resolved,
That a sum, not exceeding £1,790,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the the Expense of the Works, Buildings, Repairs, and Lands of the Air Force, including Civilian Staff and other Charges connected therewith, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932.

TECHNICAL AND WARLIKE STORES (INCLUDEING EXPERIMENTAL AND RESEARCH SERVICES).

Resolved,
That a sum, not exceeding £7,672,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Technical and Warlike Stores of the Air Force (including Experimental and Research Services), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932.

CIVIL AVIATION.

Resolved,
That a sum, not exceeding £470,000 be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Civil Aviation, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932.

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

WAYS AND MEANS.

Considered in Committee.

[Mr. DUNNTCO in the Chair.]

Resolved,
That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1930, the sum of £471,541 13s. 7d. be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.

Resolved,
That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year, ending on the 31st day of March, 1931, the sum of £2,893,000 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom.

Resolved,
That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1932, the sum of £206,693,700 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."—[Mr. Pethićk-Lawrence.]

Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

WILLS AND INTESTACIES (FAMILY MAINTENANCE) BILL.

Ordered,
That Rio Lords Message [4th March] relating to the Wills and Intestacies (Family Maintenance) Bill be now considered."—[Mr. T. Kennedy.]

Lords Message considered accordingly.

Ordered,
That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee of Six Members to be joined with a Committee to be appointed by the Lords.

Message to the Lords to acquaint them therewith and to request them to appoint an equal number of Lords to be joined with the Committee appointed by this House.

Mr. Beaumont, Mr. Arthur Henderson (Cardiff), Sir Gerald Hurst, Mr. Llewellyn Jones, Lady Noel-Buxton and Miss Rathbone nominated Members of the Committee.

Ordered,
That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers and records.

Ordered,
That Three be the quorum."—[Mr. T. Kenn edy.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. T. Kennedy.]

Adjourned at Eleven Minutes before Eleven o'Clock.